MD, PhD, FMedSci, FRSB, FRCP, FRCPEd.

When I started this blog, I promised to discuss all major alternative modalities. This is a big task, and I am not nearly there yet. For instance, I have so far written hardly anything about ‘Schuessler Salts’, a derivative of homeopathy that is hugely popular in Germany and is slowly spreading also to other countries. According to ‘Homeopathy Plus’, Schuessler’s Tissue Salts are ‘a medicine chest for the whole family’. Specifically, his is what they say:

… Tissue Salts were first developed by the German doctor, Wilhelm Schuessler, who said ill-health was caused by an imbalance in the bodies twelve vital cell salts. Schuessler believed that these imbalances could be corrected by easily absorbed and homeopathically-prepared, micro-doses of each salt.

Schuessler’s Tissue Salts (also known as biochemic or cell salts) are potentised micro-doses of the 12 essential minerals your body needs to repair and maintain itself.  They are prepared in homeopathic 6X potencies that are gentle enough to be used by the youngest to the eldest member of your family. They can even be used with pets.

Schuessler introduced his homeopathically-prepared Tissue Salts more than 100 years ago but today, they have spread to most parts of the world where families and individuals rely on them as simple home treatments for a wide range of problems.

Tissue Salts, as either individual remedies or in combination, are an ideal addition to the home medicine cabinet for simple health complaints. They are:

  • Gentle
  • Absorbed rapidly
  • Natural
  • Pleasant tasting
  • Lactose free
  • Convenient to carry
  • Non-toxic and non-addictive
  • Safe to use with prescription medicines
  • Suitable for broad, general health complaints (unlike standard homeopathy that requires more precise symptom matching).

END OF QUOTE

Other websites offer much more concrete recommendations for the 12 specific remedies; for instance this one:

1.  KALI  PHOS (Kali Phosphoricum; Potassium Phosphate)
a. mental/emotional symptoms predominate
b. Feel as if “I’m too tired to rest.”
c. Anxiety, brain fatigue, irritability, temper-tantrums, sleeplessness, dizziness,
nervous asthma
d. easily bleeding gums

2.  KALI MUR (Kali Muriaticum; Potassium Chloride)
a. white mucus, swollen glands
b. white or gray coated tongue, glandular swellings, discharge of white, thick
mucus from nose or eyes
c. indigestion from rich food

3.  KALI SULPH (Kali Sulphuricum; Potassium Sulphate)
a. yellow mucus, later stages of illness, congestion and cough worse in evening
b. dandruff, yellow coated tongue, yellow crusts on eyelids
c. gas, poor digestion

4.  CALC PHOS (Calcarea Phosphorica; Calcium Phosphate)
a. teething remedy
b. upset stomach, post-nasal drip, chronic cold feet, poor dentition

5.  CALC SULPH (Calcarea Sulphurica; Calcium Sulphate)
a. sores that heal poorly, herpes blisters
b. pain in forehead, vertigo, pimples on the face

6.  CALC FLUOR (Calcarea Fluorica; Calcium Fluoride)
a. poor tooth enamel, cracks in palms of hands, lips
b. hemorrhoids

7.  NAT MUR (Natrum Muriate; Sodium Chloride)
a.  dryness of body openings, clear thin mucus
b. effects of excess overheating; itching of hair at nape of neck
c. early stage of common colds with clear, running discharge
d. insect bites (applied locally)

8.  NAT SULPH (Natrum Sulphuricum; Sodium Sulphate)
a. rarely needed
b. green stools and other excess bile symptoms
c. Sensitive scalp, greenish-gray or greenish-brown coating on tongue, influenza

9.  NAT PHOS (Natrum Phosphoricum; Sodium Phosphate)
a. simple morning sickness; acid rising in throat
b. Headache on crown of head, eyelids glued together in morning,
c. grinding of teeth in sleep; pain and sour risings from stomach after eating

10. MAG PHOS (Magnesia Phosphorica; Magnesium Phosphate)
a. Muscle spasms, cramps and menstrual cramps, if always better with heat
b. hiccups; trembling of hands
c. teeth sensitive to cold

11. FERRUM PHOS ( Ferrum Phosphate; Ferrum Phosphate)
a. first stages of inflammation, redness, swelling, early fever
b. congestive headache, earache, sore throat
c. loss of voice from overuse

12. SILICEA (Silica)
a. white pus forming conditions, boils (“homeopathic lancet”), stony-hard glands
b. Sty in eye area, tonsillitis, brittle nails

END OF QUOTE

All these promotional websites are guilty of two remarkable omissions:

  1. these remedies are biologically implausible,
  2. there is not a jot of evidence to suggest they are more than pure placebos.

Even if the ingredients named on the bottles were effective, the salts are far too dilute (6X signifies a dilution of 1: 1000000) to have any meaningful health effects. Unsurprisingly, there is no evidence whatsoever that these remedies work. I could not find a single study on Schuessler Salts – but if anyone knows of one, I would be ready to change my view. However, I did find this quote from the ‘Government Gazette of Western Australia’ 1946:

THE following report is issued under section 210 of the Health Act, 1911-1944:- It is claimed that the above “remedy” [Dr. Schuessler’s Cell Salts, Kali Phos. 3X] is “indicated in loss of mental power, brain fog, paralysis of any part, nervous headaches, neuralgic pains, general disability and exhaustion and sleeplessness from nervous disorders.” The “remedy” has been analysed and been found to contain potassium dihydrogen phosphate and lactose. The actual quantity of potassium dihydrogen phosphate in the “adult dose” is so minute that over 9,000 tablets would be necessary to give the minimum medicinal dose of this drug. Lactose is a sugar which is of no value in the treatment of any of the above-mentioned maladies. Dr. Schuessler’s Cell Salts can therefore have no curative value. They will bring about no improvement in any of the illnesses for which they are said to be indicated. Any expenditure on the purchase of these salts will be money wasted.

— C. E. COOK, Commissioner of Public Health
END OF QUOTE
The conclusion is depressingly simple: Schuessler Salts may be popular, but they are both implausible and unproven; hence they do not belong in anyone’s medicine chest.

58 Responses to Schuessler Salts: “Any expenditure on the purchase of these salts will be money wasted”

  • After complaints by myself about advertising by the homeopathy manufacturer, Nelsons, the MHRA gave the following guidance on Schuessler/Tissue salts:

    Tissue Salts/Schuessler Salts are considered to be medicinal products if any of the following appear in promotional material:

    * the terms ‘homeopathic remedy’, and/or ‘homeopathy’ and/or ‘homeopathically prepared’
    * a numerical value for the potency eg 6X and/or the word ‘potency’ itself
    * indications for use in a medical condition

    All other cases will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis.

    This doesn’t stop anyone selling these products, but they are not permitted to say or imply they are homeopathic in any way and – like the majority of homeopathic products available to the consumer – they are not allowed to have therapeutic claims. This is because they are not licensed as medicines and not registered under the MHRA’s HR scheme or authorised under the NR scheme: products that are not in one of these two schemes are not permitted to be called homeopathic.

    If anyone spots any product (frequently in blue/orange plastic tubs, manufactured by Martin & Pleasance) that have the homeopathic ‘dilution’ of 6X on it or otherwise breaching the above guidance, you can complain to the MHRA by email at info@mhra.gov.uk..

    This applies to the UK, but similar rules may well apply to other EU countries as well.

    For full details, see Rubbing salts into the wounds of homeopathy.

    This includes an ad for ‘New Era’ salts in the February 1951 issue of the homeopathy magazine, Heal Thyself and a statement by the Commissioner for Public Health in Australia saying Schuessler cell salts “will bring about no improvement in any of the illnesses for which they are said to be indicated. Any expenditure on the purchase of these salts will be money wasted.” That was in 1946.

    • You are so wrong.
      My story would be haha’d by you but I promise you that it totally cured my neuritis in 3 days that md’s specialists etc couldn’t fix in over a month of excruciating pain.
      12 different pills and 1 short book.
      PERIOD!

      • to haha or not to haha, that is the question

      • boy boom!

      • I agree with Jeff Austin. Schuessler Salrs worked for me. As it was christmastime I couldn’t see my naturopath. So GP prescribed prescription drugs permanently for a first time bout of Trigeminal Neuralgia that caused me excruiating pain.. Not wanting to buy or take drugs permanently, I rang my naturopath who gave me directions to place drops under my tongue, two different types of Schuessler Salts every half hour. This is not an easy task but I did it even sometimes through the night. I can’t remember how many days exactly that I did that for maybe 4 to 6 days as it was eleven years ago that this remedy worked without reoccurrence of Trigeminal Neuralgia.

        • Schuessler salts seem to work because of placebo effects and the natural history of the condition etc. Test them in trials that control for these factors and you disclose them for what they are: pure placebos.

          • A placebo doesnt take away excrruiating pain. They worked for me because i took them exactly as directed by my naturopath, something that the people in your trials cannot confirm. Scheussler Salts work and that’s the reason they have been around for 130 years and will be much longer than this site..

          • You mention “placebo effects” as if it were a real thing tangible thing…..
            Can you explain to me how our conscious mind effects us and why science dare not explore this mind/body/spirit phenomena.
            It works Edzard, however; your years of reductionist philosophy education inhibit you from seeing beyond your indoctrinated education.
            Im not attacking you btw, just highlighting how narrow your advice(on this topic) because you seem to have accepted that your western medical education trumps all other medical education philosophies.

            It was Paracelsus, the Austrian alchemist that discovered the Cell Salts. in 1550. He was and is still recogised as being one the the finest true physicians. A true physician trys to heal someone and not mask their symtoms.

            The queen of England has a homeopath!

          • oh dear!
            science is mostly reductionist
            You know nothing about my education [it was not an indoctrination]
            placebo works mainly via conscious expectation and subconscious conditioning
            I very rarely give advice
            I don’t believe in any medical education philosophies
            I support anything for which there is sound evidence
            It was not Paracelsus who discovered the Schuessler salts [which are highly diluted]
            I would not like to see even my worst ememy being treated by Paracelsus
            A good physician tries to hel patients the best she can, and sometimes that’s by alleviating symptoms
            The Queen HAD a homeopath

            YOU SEE, IN YOUR SHORT COMMENT YOU MANAGED TO FORMULATE AN AMAZING AMOUNT OF NONSENCE.

          • “A placebo doesnt take away excrruiating pain”
            It can.

  • When I saw that list of things that Schuessler Salts was used to treat I thought it was a parody. Then I checked out the website. That man is seriously deranged but how can one not trust a person who personally vouches for Andrew Wakefield!

  • Perhaps interesting to know is that in 2014, Homeopathy Plus and its director Frances Sheffield were fined some $140.000 in all for misleading claims about vaccines (both the real deal and the fake homeopathic variety).
    Unfortunately, Mrs. Sheffield appears to have learned nothing, with “homeoprophylaxis” still featuring prominently on her quackery site; here too, the horrible lie is presented that homeopathy can be successfully used for treating highly infectious diseases such as ebola.

    Methinks Homeopathy Plus is due some more punishment for promoting these most egregious forms of quackery.

  • this is brilliant (www.schuessler-cell-salts.com/healing/gullibility.htm)
    SCUESSLER SALTS FOR GULLIBILITY:
    You can use the following cell salts for the treatment of gullibility :
    No. 3 (US #4) Iron phosphate
    No. 7 (US #8) Magnesium phosphate
    No. 20 Alum
    Choose the right cell salt:
    You can deside yourself wether you want to take all fitting cell salts together, only three salts at a time or only one salt at a time.
    Use of the tablets:
    3 until 6 times a day 1 – 3 tablets
    High dosage: Every 1 to 10 minutes 1 tablet
    Take the tablets one by one and let them dissolve in your mouth.
    More informations about the use of the cell salts:

  • Using very small or diluted amounts to treat certain maladies, that would otherwise be brought on in healthy people by taking a larger dose, is the very meaning of “homeopathy”. I think it’s actually a bit ignorant and even arrogant to make the statement you made above about it’s impossibility of efficacy at such small doses. More is not always better or more effective. Health in all things requires balance, and everyone’s balancing point is different.

    Also, the Government Gazette of Western Australia’s statement is also hardly worth noticing. Just because SOME people have had symptoms as a result of taking 1 of the 12 Schuessler’s tissue salts, doesn’t mean that everybody will have problems with that particular mineral, and doesn’t really say anything about the efficacy or any problems with the other 11 tissue salts. Not to mention that C.E. Cook says nothing about the dosages that he is speaking of.

    I don’t think you should necessarily discount the testimonials of generations of people who have had help from taking these minerals. And the supposed reasons for “debunking”, don’t actually hold any value or relevance.

    • thank you for your advice. however, I fear that it would send us straight back into the dark ages of medicine.

    • @EphyD on Friday 14 December 2018 at 07:34

      The same nonsense peddled by people with a stake in this nonsense. Ephy, the state of Western Australia (correct use of the title), however, the argument from authority fails miserably when viewed in the totality of authorities to quote. I was born in Kalgoorlie.

    • These salts all contain substances that are already present in the body at much higher concentrations, so I don’t see what the effect of adding nanogram quantities would be. They are also all present in tap water.

      Testimonials are a very unreliable source of evidence. Most people believe that any decision they have made is the correct one, and if they are unsure they will try to justify it to themselves; testimonials are an example of this process.

      Health does require balance, but not in the way that a lot of people seem to understand it. For 2,000 years doctors believed that illness was caused by an imbalance between four bodily fluids, and caused a lot of misery in their attempts to correct this. I have come across many other misguided theories of imbalances of one kind or another, which do not appear to be informed by any knowledge of physiology.

      Just because an idea is appealing doesn’t mean that it is true.

      • they are far too highly diluted to have any effect at all

      • “Just because an idea is appealing doesn’t mean that it is true.” Like chemotherapy and radiation! Quackery at it’s finest!

        • chemo and radiotherapy are neither appealing nor are they quackery.

          • https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cancer_Act_1939

            Cancer Act 1939
            From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
            Jump to navigationJump to search
            Cancer Act 1939
            Act of Parliament

            Long title An Act to make further provision for the treatment of cancer, to authorise the Minister of Health to lend money to the National Radium Trust, to prohibit certain advertisements relating to cancer, and for purposes connected with the matters aforesaid.
            Territorial extent not Northern Ireland
            Dates
            Royal assent 29 March 1939
            Other legislation
            Amended by National Health Service Act 1946
            Status: Amended
            Text of statute as originally enacted
            Text of the Cancer Act 1939 as in force today (including any amendments) within the United Kingdom, from legislation.gov.uk
            The Cancer Act 1939 is an Act of Parliament of the United Kingdom passed in 1939 to make further provision for the treatment of cancer, to authorise the Minister of Health to lend money to the National Radium Trust, to prohibit certain advertisements relating to cancer, and for purposes connected with the matters aforesaid. The Act does not apply in Northern Ireland.

            As of December 2014, the sole remaining provision is in respect of advertising to treat or cure cancer, all other provisions having been repealed or subsumed into other legislation.

            remission is ot cure…

          • Not sure what your point is, Brian. Can you explain?

        • What are you basing this on?

          I have cured many cancers with chemotherapy and radiotherapy over the course of my career as an oncologist, but don’t take my word for it – there is a large body of evidence in the medical literature.

          I have also had chemotherapy and radiotherapy myself.

          Do you have anything sensible to bring to this discussion?

          • The body works as a whole not separately. You may believe otherwise as you are a “specialist”. Did you ever find out or ask what caused the cancer. No… well you didn’t cure anything, because it will come back. Modern medicine is great for emergency care. You have no clue on how to treat chronic conditions including cancers. That is why you work in the field of sick care, as a puppet of big pharma and shareholders portfolios. If cancer was cured tomorrow, oh my, no job for your whole industry. That’s why it will never happen, you already know this…..shame on your profession.
            When anyone starts to believe in something, then they have shut the door to all other possibilities. There are many ways to heal and not all need to have double blind studies to prove it. Aptly named by the way, doubly blind to all else that may exist.
            Please work together as we should all be on the same team. Leave the chronic care to other modalities who believe in wholistic models rather than separated non integrated care which don’t heal.

          • You clearly have a bee in your bonnet about something, but it doesn’t seem to me that you know very much about how modern medicine operates, or anything at all about cancer.

          • You keep believing that if it helps you live on. Check your current “cure “rates past the standard 5 year period used by your standards. Absolutely criminal. Also there is no cure for cancer is there? Doesn’t the FDA shut down holistic practices that claim they can “cure” cancer?

          • you are not making much sense, I’m afraid

          • That’s very convenient. This conversation is over. Have a nice life

          • thank you – that really made me laugh!

    • @EphyD:

      Using very small or diluted amounts to treat certain maladies, that would otherwise be brought on in healthy people by taking a larger dose, is the very meaning of “homeopathy“.

      No, it isn’t. Homeopathy involves giving the patient a remedy that is claimed to cause similar symptoms in healthy people. It is the diluted remedies that are claimed to cause the symptoms.

      It’s an idea with its root in the 18th century paradigm that Hahnemann worked in, in which it was thought that a patient could only suffer from one disease at a time and externalising symptoms was a good thing, so the artificially induced symptoms would displace the original ones. Then when the remedy wore off, the symptoms it caused would disappear.

      The dilutions were just Sam’s attempt to get around the inconvenient fact that giving patients remedies that would cause their symptoms in healthy people had a remarkable tendency to cause the same symptoms in sick people and make them worse.

    • Exactly, EphyD. Recently saw on the news that ‘modern medicine’ now thinks it might be a good idea to give children with nut allergies the tiniest bit of peanut so that their immune system can kick in. Congrats…to them. They just discovered homeopathy.

      Also, they’re pursuing immunotherapy to combat cancer. Really? Ya think the immune system might have something to do with it?

      Sorry, Ed. While modern medicine can provide some miraculous surgeries and nifty diagnostics, when it comes to chronic illness and disease, we’re better off using our grandma’s treatments. There are thousands of success stories using homeopathic and ‘alternative’ treatments but you’ll never know about them if you don’t look. With the pharmaceutical industry sponsoring so much of our media programming, our news certainly won’t be investigating those cures.

      • I am glad you like your ‘stories’ – I prefer evidence.

      • “Recently saw on the news that ‘modern medicine’ now thinks it might be a good idea to give children with nut allergies the tiniest bit of peanut so that their immune system can kick in. Congrats…to them. They just discovered homeopathy.”
        This treatment is quite different from homeopathy. For one thing it uses much larger quantities of the allergen than are found in any homeopathic medicine (if you subscribe to the atomic theory of matter it is quite easy to see that they contain none of the active ingredient whatsoever). Also desensitisation is based on a growing understanding of how the immune system works (one of the most complicated systems in the body – probably more so than the brain), whereas homeopathic treatment is based on symptoms alone, with no understanding whatsoever of physiology, pathology or indeed immunology.

        By the way, peanuts are not nuts.

        “Also, they’re pursuing immunotherapy to combat cancer. Really? Ya think the immune system might have something to do with it?”
        I’m not sure what you mean by that comment. It is not news that the immune system is involved in how the body deals with cancer – you have only to look at the unusual tumours that frequently occur in people immunosuppressed after transplants, or with AIDS, to realise that. Medical scientists are now unravelling the processes and complexities of the immune system in great detail and this is leading to new treatments for cancer and other things. Personally I am very grateful for this, as without immunotherapy I wouldn’t be here.

      • Your comment makes more sense than this entire website.

        • @Antonia Jenner

          Whose comment?? Surely it’s not too much to ask people responding to others’ comments to indicate the name of the person they’re referring to? The indentation system on this blog is very unreliable and your response can appear a long distance from the comment you’re responding to.

    • I agree wholeheartedly. Someone who hasn’t studied homeopathy should not be commenting for or against.

  • I found the below quote on a website and wondered if there might be any truth? Please try to keep an open mind.

    I have knowledge that I can’t keep for myself. Fighting toxic copper with bioavailable copper is exactly the right method !

    You should try Schuessler’s cell salts. It’s kinda homeopathic but way more powerful. Try cell salt nr.19 cuprum arsenicosum (= copper), it’s 100% bioavailable and it works very fast. If you didn’t know about the cell salts yet, then it will be like a holy grail for you. I also do hair tests and I treat myself and others with cell salts. The salts melt in your mouth and go directly into your blood, right into the cells. So you skip stomach en intestines, where classic supplements die.

    • I found the below quote on a website and wondered if there might be any truth?

      NO!

      Please try to keep an open mind.

      https://edzardernst.com/2018/08/random-thoughts-on-the-issue-of-an-open-mind/

      • Look you’ll never be able to avail yourself of a natural cure for illnesses you may have so why dont you leave it at that and let people make up their own mind. Natural therapies have been used around the world, being used today and will be in future because they work. There is a list of ten Tissue Salts Practitioners in Brisbane that I found and thats not all of the naural therapists in Brisbane. Why do you think that people go to them, get well without presciption drugs and then maintain their health by six monthly visits to their naturopath? Do you even know how many people swear by their naturopath for drugfree health for their whole family? No, you don’t, just like you’ll never know the feeling of natural health.

        • thank you; you convinced me with this sharp logic.

        • @Janice Davies

          “why dont you leave it at that and let people make up their own mind.” Why don’t we do that in all areas of life?

          You want to fly with a pilot who thinks the air regulations are a merely device of “Big Aviation” to line their pockets with licensing fees: why don’t we just let people make up their own minds?

          You want to invest money in a fraudulent scheme that has a lot of positive testimonials from other investors: why should regulators attempt to prevent people investing?

          Caveat emptor should be sufficient advice for everyone. Nobody should be protected from practitioners of unproven medical treatments. They should be allowed to make up their minds on the basis of the equivalent of TripAdvisor or Amazon reviews or any other anecdotes you can find through Google.

          You ask: “Why do you think that people go to them, get well without presciption drugs and then maintain their health by six monthly visits to their naturopath?” Because — pick any of the following or combinations thereof you like — (a) there was nothing wrong with them in the first place; (b) their disease was one from which everybody usually gets better anyway [most diseases are like that]; (c) regression to the mean; (d) placebo effects; (e) they’re deluding themselves [as most of us do at least some of the time].

    • This is the website Tony Powell refers to. It’s fascinating to read the comments. The whole site is a testament to people who self-diagnose a problem then pay for huge amounts of bizarre dietary supplements in an effort to cure them: a paradise of self-help gullibility.

    • Schuessler’s cell salts are not permitted to call themselves homeopathic in the UK:

      Rubbing salts into the wounds of homeopathy

      Because they are not registered, authorised or hold a Marketing Authorisation, they are not permitted to make medicinal claims.

      They also are highly unlikely to meet the requirements for authorised health and nutrition claims.

      They are simply expensive (and useless) food stuffs.

  • All these so called arguments fail to make an intelligent case and completely ignore simple high school bio chemistry. Sodium salts are responsible for maintaining the electric potential of nerve fibers and muscle tissues for example. These are the same “doctors” who poison us with sodium fluoride saying it’s good for our teeth. Last time I checked teeth and bones are made of Calcium, but I’m sure our physicians have been taught better by the big pharma sponsored “studies”.

    • NO IDEA WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT!
      certainly not about Schuessler salts; they contain nothing

    • @Most Recent

      Last time I checked teeth and bones are made of Calcium, but I’m sure our physicians have been taught better by the big pharma sponsored “studies”.

      No, your dental enamel is made of calcium phosphate (© high school biochemistry). Acid in the mouth can hydrolyse calcium phosphate and weaken enamel. When there are fluoride ions around they interact to form calcium fluoroapatite — Ca5(PO4)3F — which is way stronger than calcium phosphate itself.

      And sodium fluoride has zero toxic effects at the dose of 1 mg/L that’s used in fluoride-treated water. On the other hand, chlorine, which is used to disinfect water supplies, is potentially more hazardous than fluorine: it’s supplied at concentrations of only 0.2–0.5 mg/L. And neither fluorine nor chlorine is a ‘Big Pharma’ product.

      Apart from all that, your comment is very profound wisdom and shows clearly the extent of attention you paid during your high school biochemistry classes.

  • Here is another one for you.
    Modern medicine is about 100 years old. How do you explain the rise in disease across the board.
    We have currently 10’s of thousands of conditions….really! Is is there just the human condition…

    • Brian said:

      Modern medicine is about 100 years old. How do you explain the rise in disease across the board.

      Can you give the life expectancy at birth 100 years ago and what it is today?

  • “How do you explain the rise in disease across the board.”

    Better diagnosis.

    • Better diagnosis when you spend maybe 5-10 mins with a patient and not listen to what they are saying, so you can maximize your daily production. Corporate medicine. You are very deluded for someone who’s supposedly very intelligent.

  • Excellent article … Dr. Benviste’s experiments proved beyond a shadow of doubt that high dilutions have no pharmacological effect. However, this is not what homeopaths claim; as explained by Prof. Vithoulkas. Homeopaths essentially claim that homeopathic dilutions are antidoping so that, in the context of the Benvenisre experiment, cells poisoned with APIs would recover after treatment with a homeopathic dilution of Apis. To my knowledge, this claim has not been tested, even though it ought to be easy to perform; perhaps as gettering. Alternately, does homeopathic diluted salt water dissolve more salt than distilled water? To my knowledge it doesn’t, but this feature may not apply to organisms. In summary, there is no evidence either way in my opinion!

  • Further to my previous comment – apologies for typos – I believe homeopathic preparations and Schuessler salts should be relabelled as iApis for example. In other words, we should use the mathematical prefix ‘i’ or ‘j’ to signify ‘imaginary’ or ‘virtual.’ Now I don’t claim these preparations don’t have any utility; I just believe there is no evidence they do; and there is no theory to support how they might!

    PS: Previous typo – Dr. Benveniste

  • “I just believe there is no evidence they do; and there is no theory to support how they might”
    No, I don’t belive in witchcraft either.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

If you want to be able to edit your comment for five minutes after you first submit it, you will need to tick the box: “Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.”
Recent Comments

Note that comments can be edited for up to five minutes after they are first submitted but you must tick the box: “Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.”

The most recent comments from all posts can be seen here.

Categories