Treating Leick with like: response to criticisms of the use of entanglement to illustrate homeopathy

Lionel R. Milgrom

doi:10.1016/j.homp.2008.02.002

Homeopathy, Table of Contents

Homeopathy 2008; 97(02): 96-99
DOI: 10.1016/j.homp.2008.02.002

Debate

Treating Leick with like: response to criticisms of the use of entanglement to illustrate homeopathy

Authors

Lionel R. Milgrom

Subject Editor:

Abstract

In criticising papers which recently appeared in Homeopathy, Leick claims that no double blind randomised clinical trials (DBRCTs) show that homeopathy is efficacious, and that specific effects of substances diluted beyond Avogadro's limit are implausible. He states that generalised entanglement models should be able to improve the design of experiments to test ultra-high dilutions, and disparages the authors' understandings of quantum physics. The paper responds to those criticisms. Several DBRCTs have shown that homeopathy has effects which are not due to placebo and these are now supported by preclinical work. This area of theory is in its infancy and it is unreasonable to expect it to have generated experiments at this stage. The authors have used accepted interpretations of quantum theory: Leick's view is coloured by skepticism concerning homeopathy.

Keywords

Leick - Double blind randomised clinical trials - Quantum entanglement - Homeopathy

Full Text

References

References
1 Leick P. Comment on: “conspicuous by its absence: the memory of water, macro-entanglement, and the possibility of homeopathy” and “The nature of the active ingredient in ultramolecular dilutions”. Homeopathy 2008; 97: 50-51.
2 Weingärtner O. The nature of the active ingredient in ultramolecular dilutions. Homeopathy 2007; 96: 220-226.
3 Walach H. Entanglement model of homeopathy as an example of generalized entanglement predicted by weak quantum theory. Forsch Komplementarmed 2003; 10: 192-200.
4 Milgrom L.R. Conspicuous by its absence: the memory of water, macro-entanglement, and the possibility of homeopathy. Homeopathy 2007; 96: 209-219 and references therein.
5 An overview of positive homeopathy research and surveys. European Network of Homeopathy Researchers, March 2007.
6 Belon P., Cumps J., Ennis M. et al. Histamine dilutions modulate basophil activity. Inflamm Res 2004; 53: 181-183.
7 Welles S.U., Suanjak-Traidl E., Weber S. et al. Does pretreatment with thyroxin (10⁻⁸ M) enhance a “curative” effect of homeopathically prepared thyroxin (10⁻³⁰) on highland frogs? Results of a multi researcher study. Forsch Komplementarmed 2007; 14: 353-357.
8 Weber S., Welles S.U., Suanjak-Traidl E. et al. The effect of homeopathically prepared thyroxin on highland frogs is influenced by electromagnetic fields. Homeopathy 2008; 97: 3-9.
9 Milgrom L.R. Homeopathy, fundamentalism, and the memory of water. Curr Oncol 2007; 14: 221-222.
10 Shang A., Huwiler-Müntener K., Nartey L. et al. Are the clinical effects of homoeopathy placebo effects? Comparative study of placebo-controlled trials of homoeopathy and allopathy. Lancet 2005; 366: 726-732.
11 Moher D., Cook D.J., Eastwood S., Olkin I., Rennie D., Stroup D.F. Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of individual controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses Lancet 1999; 354: 1896-1900.
12a See, for example Bell I.R. All evidence is equal, but some evidence is more equal than others: can logic prevail over emotion in the homeopathy debate?. J Altern Complement Med 2005; 11: 763-769.
12b Frass M., Schuster E., Muchitsch I. et al. Bias in the trial and reporting of trials of homeopathy: a fundamental breakdown in peer review and standards?. J Altern Complement Med 2005; 11: 780-782.
12c Kienle H. Failure to exclude false negative bias: a fundamental flaw in the trial of Shang, et al. J Altern Complement Med 2005; 11: 783.
12d Peters D. Shang. et al. Carelessness, collusion, or conspiracy?. J Altern Complement Med 2005; 11: 779-780.
13 Rao M.L., Roy R., Bell I.R., Hoover R. The defining role of structure (including epitaxy) in the plausibility of homeopathy. Homeopathy 2007; 96: 175-182.
14 See Chaplin M. Water structure and behavior. www.lsbu.ac.uk/water/ [accessed 18/01/2008].
15 Peters D. (ed). Understanding the Placebo Effect in Complementary Medicine: Theory, Practice, and Research. 2001. London: Churchill–Livingstone.;
16 Harrington A. (ed). The Placebo Effect: an Interdisciplinary Exploration. 1999. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.;
17 Weatherley-Jones E., Thompson E.A., Thomas K.J. The placebo-controlled trial as a test of complementary and alternative medicine: observations from research experience and individualized homeopathic treatment. Homeopathy 2004; 93: 186-189.
18 Haake M., Muller H.H., Schade-Brittinger C. et al. German Acupuncture Trials (GERAC) for chronic low back pain: randomized, multicenter, blinded, parallel-group trial with 3 groups. Arch Intern Med 2007; 167: 1892-1898.
19 Leigh E.A. Safer place for patients: learning to improve patient safety: 51st report of session 2005–06 report, together with formal minutes, oral, and written evidence. House of Commons papers 831 2005–06 TSO (The Stationery Office); 6th July 2006.
20 Schmid G.B. Much ado about entanglement: a novel approach to test non-local communication via violation of ‘local realism’. Forsch Komplementarmed Klass Naturheilkd 2005; 12: 214-222.
21 Gernert D. Conditions for entanglement. Front Perspec 2005; 14: 8-13.
22 Schrödinger E. Discussion of probability relations between separated systems. Proc Camb Philol Soc 1935; 31: 555-563.
23 Schrödinger E. Discussion of probability relations between separated systems. Proc Camb Philol Soc 1936; 32: 446-451.
24 Bell J.S. On the Einstein Podolsky Rosen paradox. Physics 1964; 1: 195-201.
25 Bell J.S. mechanics. Speakable and unspeakable in quantum. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 1987.
26 Aspect A., Grnager P., Roger R. et al. Experimental realization of Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen–Bohm gedanken (thought) experiment: a violation of Bell's Inequalities. Phys Rev Lett 1982; 49: 91-94.
27 Chrastina D. http://shpalman.livejournal.com/tag/lionel+milgrom [accessed on 15/01/2008].
28 Nikolic H. Quantum mechanics: myths and facts. Found Phys 2007; 27: 1563-1611.
29 Popescu S. Quantum mechanics. Why isn't nature more non-local?. http://colossalstorage.net/quantum_mechanics.pdf [accessed 15/01/2008].
30 Atmanspacher H., Römer H., Walach H. Weak quantum theory; complementarity and entanglement in physics and beyond. Found Phys 2002; 32: 379-406.
31 Wooters W.K. Quantum entanglement as a quantifiable resource. Philos Trans R Soc Lond A 1998; 89: 127-140.
32 Zeilinger A. Quantum teleportation and the nature of reality. http://www.btgjapan.org/catalysts/anton.html 2004 [on-line document accessed 18/01/2008].
33 Collingwood R.G. An essay on metaphysics. Revised edn. Oxford: Clarendon Press; 1998, orig. 1940.
34 See the blog-site: http://shpalman.livejournal.com/3264.html?thread=7360 [accessed 21/01/2008].
35 Ullman D. The homeopathic revolution: famous people and cultural heroes who chose homeopathy. http://www.homeopathicrevolution.com [accessed 19/01/2008].