VOLUME V: Selected Facebook Updates And Tweets Of Chandran K C On Scientific Homeopathy

All the published scientific studies regarding PHYSICAL properties of potentized homeopathic drugs have shown that the SPECTRA of light REFLECTED by them have FREQUENCIES different from that we obtain from unpotentized water-ethyl alcohol mixture.

Based on the reported observations of changed ‘frequencies’ homeopathic ‘theoreticians’and ‘intellectuals’ make a lot of fancifull theories about homeopathy. They believe and try to make others believe that these observations have proved their ‘energy medicine’ theories. According to them, potentized drugs produce cures by acting on ‘vital force’ by ‘resonance of frequencies’. Vital force of each individual vibrates in specific frequencies. Disease is caused by derangement of these vibrations. Potentized ‘similimum’ having most similar vibrations can rectify the derangement of vibrations of vital force through ‘fesonance’, thereby restoring the health.

Where as some ‘theoreticians’ say the ‘vibrations’ of potentized drugs are due to ‘electromagnetic radiations’, some others say it is ‘radioactivity’. Most of them use the terms ‘radioactivity’ and ‘electromagnetic radiations’ as interchangeable equivalents, displaying their utter ignorance regarding the topics they are talking about.

Actually, observations of difference in spectra of light reflected by potentized drugs and unpotentized water-alcohol mixture has to be understood and interpreted with a rational and scientific perspective. All these studies were done using different techniques of SPECTROSCOPY, which is the most accurate and reliable method of studying the molecular level and atomic level structure and conformation of matter. Even though there are different techniques, instruments and methods currently employed in spectrometry, basically it is all about sending LIGHT RAYS of known frequency into the sample to be probed, and then studying the REFLECTED or TANSMITTED rays by measuring the change in their frequencies. Analyzing the CHANGES happened in the frequencies of light SPECTRA, scientists reach conclusions about the particle level structure and organization.

Not only potentized drugs, any MATERIAL particle in this universe will show changes in reflected or transmitted SPECTRA OF LIGHT, when they are subjected to spectroscopic studies.

Difference in spectra of light reflected from potentized drugs and unpotentized water-alcohol medium proves that certain changes occur in the supra-molecular arrangement of water-ethyl molecules during potentization. Such an observation no way proves potentized drug act as medicinal agents using RESONANCE OF FREQUENCIES. Supra- molecular changes in potentizing medium happening during potentization should be understood in terms of MOLECULAR IMPRINTING, which will help us in explaining biological mechanism of high dilution therapeutics and ‘similia similibus curentur’ in a way fitting to modern scientific knowledge system.

Theorizations of ‘energy medicine’ proponents based on weird and ‘hijacked’ interpretations of published scientific studies only demonstrates their ignorance regarding principles and methods of modern science.


It is a clinically experienced and experimentally verified fact that potentized drugs act upon organism in a way exactly opposite to the parent drugs. Actually, this observation is the basis of homeopathic ‘drug proving’ as well as ‘similia similibus curentur’.

Why a drug substance in ‘potentized’ form act upon living organism in a reverse direction to its action in crude or ‘molecular’ form? What may be the molecular mechanism involved in this ‘reverse’ action?

Whole riddles of homeopathy will be resolved once we could explain this phenomenon of ‘reverse action’ rationally and scientifically in a way fitting to modern biochemistry and kinetics of biomolecular interactions.

Phenomenon of ‘reverse actions’ of potentized forms and crude forms of same drug substance could be rationally explained only if we perceive potentized drugs in terms of MOLECULAR IMPRINTS of drug molecules, and understand these molecular imprints as three-dimensional nanocavities depressions ‘engraved’ into a water-ethyl alcohol supra-molecular matrix.

Beyond any doubt, only MIT concepts can answer the fundamental questions of homeopathy, and resolve the riddles haunting this wonderful therapeutic art.


I am trying hard to explore the BIOLOGICAL MECHANISM of ‘similia similibus curentur’ in terms of modern biochemistry and molecular imprinting. When somebody intervenes my discussions and try to ‘teach’ me their ‘energy medicine’ theory that “root cause of diseases is the deranged flow of vital energy happening at spiritual level”, I simply loose my cool!


My concern is not about INVENTING ‘new theories’, ‘new methods’ or ‘new drugs’ in homeopathy. My work is all about RE-INVENTING ‘homeopathy’ itself. RE-BUILDING homeopathy. You cannot reconstruct something, without deconstructing something.


It is a very tough and tiring job to talk to a community who either do not understand what I am talking about, or are not interested in the topics I am talking about. Still, I keep on talking, day in and day out, because it is my mission. I have no other options. Once you fall into waters, you have to keep on swimming and swimming, if you want to stay alive without drowning!


Active principles of many drug substances as wel as pathogenic agents, especially of plant and animal origin, are protein molecules. Preparing MOLECULAR IMPRINTS of drug molecules and pathogenic molecules of PROTEIN nature poses a big challenge. Biological properties and drug properties- whether it be pathogenic or therapeutic- properties of potein molecules are determined by their three-dimensional conformations, in capacity of which they bind to specific biological targets. Once this three-dimensional tertiary structure of protein molecules are disturbed, their biological and medicinal properties undergo drastic changes.

When CRUDE or molecular forms of drug substances of biological origin are introduced into body for drug proving, or as part of accidental poisoning, environmental exposures, ingestion or infections, protein molecules contained in them act up on their body and produce symptoms by their properties as arising from their specific three-dimensional PROTEIN structures.

We need exact MOLECULAR IMPRINTS of drug molecules and pathogenic molecules for using them as perfect and target-specific therapeutic agents according to the principle SIMILIA SIMILIBUS CURENTUR.

Protein molecules will change their three-dimensional conformation and undergo a process of DENATURATION if they are allowed to interact with alcohol, since it is a very powerful denaturing agent. Since we use ethyl alcohol for preparing medicinal tinctures, and water-ethyl alcohol mixture as potentizing medium, there exist chances of protein molecules contained in our drug substances undergoing denaturation before they are potentized. As such, we get only MOLECULAR IMPRINTS of those denatured protein molecules in our potentized drugs- not exact molecular imprints of original protein molecules. This makes a big difference regarding the medicinal properties of potentized drugs prepared from drug substances consisting of protein molecules as their active ingredients. This explains why we fail to cure life threatening emergencies of snake- bites using potentized venom, or cancer using carcinosin, or any particular infectious disease using its own specific causative agent or disease product in potentized form.

This factor points to the necessity of evolving new molecular imprinting protocols and molecular imprinting medium that do not contain ethyl alcohol, especially for potentizing drug substances of BIOLOGICAL origin.


Modern scientists so far studied only MOLECULAR IMPRINTED SYNTHETIC POLYMERS. The fact is, not only SYNTHETIC polymers, but any NATURAL POLYMER such as PROTEINS, CARBOHYDRATES, NUCLEIC ACIDS, FATS, and even WATER, which as POLYMER-LIKE properties at SUPRA MOLECULAR LEVEL, could be used as medium for molecular imprinting. Formation of ANTIBODIES is a natural process of molecular imprinting in nature, where as POTENTIZATION is an artificial way of molecular imprinting in water developed by hahnemann. Molecular imprinting plays a role even in natural phenomena of CRYSTAL growth, molecular mechanism of prion diseases etc as well. A lot of study has to be done in this field.


ANTIBODIES or IMMUNE BODIES are MOLECULAR IMPRINTED PROTEINS- native globulin proteins getting ‘imprinted’ by interacting with ANTIGENS. Antigens are endogenous or exogenous proteins ‘alien’ to the genetic substance of the body. Exogenous antigens are proteins entering the body fluids from the environment, where as endogenous antigens are either misfolded native proteins or proteins synthesized by mutated genes. Proteins released by parasites and bacteria residing in our body also act as antigens.

Even though the primary role of IMMUNE BODIES is defending the body from the attacks of ALIEN proteins, the immune bodies remain in the body as antibodies or MOLECULAR IMPRINTS of alien proteins. These antibodies or molecular imprinted proteins, due to the presence of ‘imprints’ or three dimensional depressions on them with configurations complementary to the specific antigens or ‘alien’ proteins, can bind to various biological target molecules that may occasionally acquire similar configurations by interacting with co-factors or other effector molecules. This results in pathological molecular inhibitions in related biochemical pathways. This is the biological mechanism involved in so-called ‘auto-immune diseases’ and the whole range of diseases hahnemann called as chronic ‘miasmatic’ diseases.

Over and above acting as CAUSATIVE FACTORS of diverse types of chronic diseases, these ANTIBODIES or MOLECULAR IMPRINTS may also play the role of FACILITATORS for infectious agents or other pathogenic molecules, by helping them to bind to the biological molecules by making configurational changes in their binding sites. This explains the commonly explained phenomenon of miasms increasing the chances of infections and other diseases.

Once homeopaths understand and accept this scientific explanation of MIASMS, all confusions related with subject will be resolved for ever. More over, ‘miasms’ will thereby become a scientific concept, that could be incorporated into the paradigms of modern medical science.


Excuse me, a bit of philosophy today!

I think ADWAITHA of ancient INDIAN philosophy, and the DIALECTICAL of ancient western philosophy are words used by the masters to explain SAME universal reality. Both refers to a a peculiar relationship working inside and in between EVERYTHING in this universe. Things may appear as ONE or TWO, but actually are neither ONE nor TWO. Something that appears as DUAL, but SINGULAR is essence- Something that appears SINGULAR, but DUAL in essence. It is actually what is meant by both ADWAITHA and DIALECTICAL.


According to CONVENTIONAL homeopaths, anything you say about homeopathy should be FITTING to the ‘aphorisms’ of ORGANON. Otherwise, you will not be a ‘true’ homeopath!

There are many things in ORGANON that does not agree with modern scientific knowledge. There are many things that are totally UNSCIENTIFIC. As such, you cannot talk SCIENTIFIC HOMEOPATHY in a way ‘fitting’ to the ‘aphorisms’ of ORGANON. You cannot make homeopathy a MEDICAL SCIENCE if you are not ready to abandon those unscientific things we were so far taught as part of ‘fundamental principles’ of homeopathy.


CONVENTIONAL HOMEOPATHS learn SCIENCE from the standpoint of ORGANON, where as SCIENTIFIC HOMEOPATHS learn ORGANON from the standpoint of modern SCIENCE. It makes all the difference in their approaches, perspectives, paradigms and methods of practice.


I am not talking about ‘aphorisms’ or ‘beliefs’. I am talking about my rational interpretations of similia similibus curentur, based on modern scientific knowledge of life, disease, drugs and cure.

Please note, nothing is said in organon about MOLECULAR IMPRINTING also.

If you think we should talk about homeopathy only in terms of ‘aphorisms’ written 200 years ago when scientific knowledge was in its primitive state, you cannot even think about ‘molecular imprints’ active factors of potentized drugs. You cannot talk about genetics, enzymes, ligand-receptor kinetics, antibodies , molecular pathology or anything like that. According to you ‘true’ homeopathy will be mere repeating of aphorisms in organon! You will feel ‘very very very sorry’ when somebody says something that do not fit to ‘aphorisms’.


Many homeopaths believe POTENTIZATION is a process of ‘dividing’ drug substance into smaller fractions, ultimately ‘converting’ them into ‘energy’, and transferring the ‘dynamic energy’ so released into sugar of milk or rectified spirit. Nobody so far taught them to think about potentization in terms of MOLECULAR IMPRINTING.


When I talk about BIOCHEMISTRY, many homeopaths tend to compare it with SCHUSSLER’S ‘BIIOCHEMISTRY’. Actually, Schussler’s concept of ‘biochemical salts’ represent the most primitive, pre-scientific, infantile stage of BIOCHEMISTRY. Schissler actually was studying the ‘mineral content’ of ASH obtained by burning the tissues of living organisms. Schussler’s ‘biochemic salts’ has nothing to do with the very complex, ‘live’, BIOLOGICAL MOLECULES studied by MODERN BIOCHEMISTRY.

Comparing MODERN BIOCHEMISTRY with SCHUSSLER’S ‘biochemic salts’ is inappropriate, irrelevant and it indicates ignorance of modern biochemistry and its scientific paradigms.


We all know, our homeopathic drug SEPIA is prepared from INK of CUTTLE FISH. It contains a number of chemicals in a variety of different concentrations, depending on the species. However, its main constituents are MELANIN and mucus. It can also contain, among other things, tyrosinase, dopamine and L-DOPA, and small amounts of amino acids, including taurine, aspartic acid, glutamic acid, alanine and lysine. SEPIA INK also contains large amounts of aquatic minerals such as iodine, sodium, fluorine, iodine etc absorbed from sea water in which they live.

That means, SEPIA is not a SINGLE DRUG as we are made to believe. It is a COMPOUND DRUG. During DRUG PROVING, all these different chemical constituents of SEPIA act in their INDIVIDUAL capacities up on different biological targets during drug proving, produce molecular errors that are expressed through vaious groups of subjective and objective symptoms.

When POTENTIZED, these different chemical molecules undergo molecular imprinting as INDIVIDUAL MOLECULES. As such, potentized SEPIA will be a combination of diverse types of MOLECULAR IMPRINTS that represent different types of constituent chemical molecules. When used as therapeutic agent, these individual molecular imprints bind to specific PATHOGENIC MOLECULES having complementary conformation.

Dear friend, do you still BELIEVE, SEPIA is a SINGLE drug?

This explanation and question is applicable to all homeopathic drugs. PLEASE THINK OVER!


While learning MATERIA MEDICA, we should always remember that the SYMPTOMS are the subjective and objective INDICATORS to the molecular errors the drug substance could produce in the organism. These MOLECULAR ERRORS are produced by the INDIVIDUAL constituent molecules of drug substance interacting with INDIVIDUAL biological molecules. We should also remember, we are actually studying the drug symptoms to study the molecular errors the drug could produce in the body, and then compare the ‘similarity’ of these symptoms with disease symptoms so that we can indirectly identify the exactly SIMILAR molecular errors underlying the disease, so that we can select a drug that in ‘molecular imprints’ form can remove the pathological molecular errors according thi SIMILIA principle.


Homeopathic drug SEPIA is the INK of CUTTLEFISH. Cuttlefish are marine animals of the order Sepiida. They belong to the class Cephalopoda, which also includes squid, octopuses and nautiluses. Despite their name, cuttlefish are not fish but molluscs.

Cuttlefish are sometimes referred to as the “chameleons of the sea” because of their remarkable ability to rapidly alter their skin color at will. Cuttlefish change color and pattern, including of light polarisation and even texture to communicate to other cuttlefish, to camouflage themselves, and in deimatic display to warn off potential predators.

SEPIA INK is a dark pigment released into water by most species of cephalopod, usually as an escape mechanism.

The ink is released from the ink sacs located between the gills, and is dispersed more widely by accompanying its release with a jet of water from the siphon. Its dark color is caused by its main constituent, melanin.

Each species of cephalopod produces slightly differently coloured inks; generally, octopuses produce black ink, squid ink is blue-black and cuttlefish ink is brown.

SEPIA ink contains a number of chemicals in a variety of different concentrations, depending on the species. However, its main constituents are MELANIN and mucus. It can also contain, among other things, tyrosinase, dopamine and L-DOPA, and small amounts of amino acids, including taurine, aspartic acid, glutamic acid, alanine and lysine. SEPIA INK also contains large amounts of aquatic minerals suchas iodine, sodium, fluorine, iodine etc absorbed from sea water in which they live.

When potentized, SEPIA contains MOLECULAR IMPRINTS of all these constituent chemical molecules, which are the active principles of potentized SEPIA.

In molecular biology, Tyrosinase refers to an oxidase, which is the rate limiting enzyme for controlling the production of melanin. It is mainly involved in two distinct reactions of melanin synthesis; firstly, the hydroxylation of a monophenol and secondly, the conversion of an o-diphenol to the corresponding o-quinone. o-Quinone undergoes several reactions to eventually form melanin. Tyrosinase is a copper-containing enzyme present in plant and animal tissues that catalyzes the production of melanin and other pigments from tyrosine by oxidation, as in the blackening of a peeled or sliced potato exposed to air. It is found inside melanosomes.

A mutation in the tyrosinase gene resulting in impaired tyrosinase production leads to type I oculocutaneous albinism, a hereditary disorder.
Tyrosinase activity is very important. If uncontrolled during melanoma, it results in increased melanin synthesis. Several polyphenols including flavonoids or stilbenoid, substrate analogues, free radical scavengers and copper chelators have been known to inhibit tyrosinase.

MOLECULAR IMPRINTS of tyrosinase molecules contained in potentized SEPIA can remove the molecular errors caused by various types of INHIBITORS that cause certain types of albinism, leucoderma and hypopigmentations.

MMOLECULAR IMPRINTS of certain chemical constituents of SEPIA act homeopathically by binding to the pathogenic molecules that inhibit MELANOCORTIN RECEPTORS in melanocytes, which are the natural binding sites of MELANOCYTE STIMULATING HORMONES that induce production of MELANIN, the skin pigment of our body

MELANOCORTIN RECEPTORS lie within the cell membrane, and is signalled by melanocyte-stimulating hormone (MSH) released by the pituitary gland. When activated by MSH, it initiates a complex signaling cascade that leads to the production of the brown or black pigment eumelanin. In contrast, the receptor can also be antagonized by agouti signalling peptide (ASIP), which reverts the cell back to producing the yellow or red phaeomelanin.

MOLECULAR IMPRINTS of melainin, dopamine and L-DOPA, taurine, aspartic acid, glutamic acid, alanine and lysine, iodine fluorine, bromine sodium etc contained in potentized SEPIA decide the diverse types its homeopathic therapeutic actions when used according to SIMILIA SIMILIBUS CURENTUR.


A ‘BIG’ repertory on our table does not guarantee success, if we do not know how to take case properly, prepare the rubrics and repertorize systematically. Number of drugs or rubrics in a repertory we use is not that much important, if we know how to use our tools productively. After working with KENT more than 40 years, now I am confident I can solve any case using even BOERICKE repertory alone. I can even manage almost all cases with a REPERTORY of maximum 500 mentals and physical generals, and a medicine chest containing only 100 remedies in 30C potency.


I want to repeat again and again: Mastering the art of CASE TAKING is the only guarantee to successful PRESCRIPTION. Extracting right information from the patient, and CONSTRUCTING as many number of COMPLETE symptoms as possible using that info is what we mean by successful case taking. A symptom is said to be a COMPLETE symptom, when it consists of maximum available number of strong characteristic ACCESSORIES belonging to categories such as CAUSATION, PRESENTATION, LOCATION, SENSATION, MODALITIES and CONCOMITANTS. Even a single ‘complete’ symptom, if it indicates only a single drug, may in certain cases lead us to a reasonable prescription. Case taking is a skill to be consciously developed by individual homeopaths, if they really want to be a successful prescribers.


I feel very sorry for majority homeopathic community and their ‘leaders’ not trying to realize the revolutionary implications of MIT concepts upon the future advancement of homeopathy as a true MEDICAL SCIENCE. Earlier they realize and accept it, the better will be the prospects of homeopathy. Come out of the shells! You are missing a great opportunity, friends!




I always wonder what will happen to MIT concepts if I die at this moment. Will anybody take this mission forward, or, will it be the end of MIT? What precautions I should take to ensure it will stay here even if I have to leave? Any suggestions, dear friends?


Can you imagine how much humiliating experience it would be for me to be ‘validated’ by somebody who I am sure is totally ignorant and far inferior to me regarding the knowledge in the subjects being validated?


It will be a very difficult job for an average person to be IMPARTIAL and UNPREJUDICED in validating something that undermines all his existing beliefs, positions, fame and fortunes!


How can an ‘expert committee’ consisting of experts in ‘conventional’ UNSCIENTIFIC beliefs and theories of homeopathy ‘review’, ‘validate’, ‘accept’, or ‘reject’ MIT concepts of SCIENTIFIC homeopathy about which they are totally ignorant and prejudiced, especially when the MIT concepts go against the belief system they consider as real homeopathy? It will be like entrusting a language teacher to do the valuation work of examination papers of a physics student!!


All the great intellectual revelations in human history regarding TRUTH happened not through ‘official’ ways and ‘formal’ procedures. It just happens- that is all.


Responding to my earlier letter requesting to appoint sub-committee of experts to look into the viability and implications of MIT concepts, and to recommend future course of actions and research projects on MIT, Dr Raj Manchanda, Director General of CCRH had informed me that Dr Anil Khurana and Dr. Debadatta Nayak have been asked to “look into this aspect as requested”.

After elapsing one month, Dr Anil Khurana is asking me to wait for a ‘notification’ to be published shortly, inviting ‘applications’ for ‘expression of interest’ “to undertake fundamental/basic research studies in collaboration with scientists associated with reputed organizations, preferably of Government/non-profit making.”

He also informs me that I “may submit the concept paper after EoI notification”, only if I “can take up study at your institute (if non-profit) or in association with other reputed Government/non-profit organizations”, which will be then “reviewed by the Expert Committee and subject experts, and as per the recommendations of the committee, future action will be taken up”

It is obvious that Dr Anil Khurana or Dr Debadatta Nayak did not comply with the direction of their Director General to “”look into this aspect as requested”. They did not look the papers I had attached with the request, or try to understand what was actually “requested”. Instead, they very simply dispatched me a letter explaining the official procedures of ‘notifications’, ‘expression of interests’, ‘terms and conditions’, ‘concept paper’, ‘reviews’, ‘recommendations’, ‘expert committee’ and such things.

I still hope Dr Raj Manchanda would look into the matter once again, and examine whether his subordinates did comply with his directive to “look into this aspect as requested” in my submission.



from: Similimum <similimum@gmail.com>

to: “Dr R. K. Manchanda” <rkmanchanda18@yahoo.com>
date: Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 6:29 PM

subject: Fwd: MIT concepts of scientific homeopathy
mailed-by: gmail.com


I am herewith forwarding a reply I got from Dr Anil Khurana for my earlier submission to CCRH

I feel sorry, sir.

In order to comply with the ‘terms and conditions’ of CCRH to submit EOI, I have to be a “scientist associated with reputed organizations, preferably of Government/non-profit making”.

I can submit “concept paper” for EOI only if I “can take up study at my own institute (if non-profit) or in association with other reputed Government/non-profit organizations”.

Even if I submit a “concept paper” that comply with “terms and conditions” of CCRH, that “concept paper will be reviewed by the Expert Committee and subject experts, and as per the recommendations of the committee, future action will be taken up.”

It is now obvious that we need not expect an INITIATIVE or proactive role from CCRH on MIT. We have to submit ‘application’ when ‘notification’ is published. If our ‘application’ complies with terms and conditions, our ‘concept paper’ will be ‘reviewed by expert committee’ and ‘as per their recommendations, future actions will be taken up’. It is the ROUTINE procedure for getting CCRH FUNDING. I would prefer to stay away from this process, as I do not qualify as a “scientist associated with reputed organizations, preferably of Government/non-profit making”. That would save me from the humiliation of getting my ‘application rejected by experts’ for not complying with official ‘terms and conditions.

I am not a candidate for PhD, or I am not requesting for any FUNDING. I am not an APPLICANT for any favor from any AUTHORITY. I do not think there is any EXPERT associated with CCRH who can REVIEW and evaluate MIT concepts to accept or reject it. I HAVE MY OWN WAYS AND MEANS FOR GOING FORWARD WITH MIT.

MIT concepts will stay here if it is right, even without any ‘recommendations’ and certifications from any ‘expert committee’ or ‘authority’.

By handling my suggestion for co-operation in a purely OFFICIAL way, CCRH has spoiled a big opportunity for scientific advancement of homeopathy. Their ‘official’ response has demonstrated their inertia, disinterest and lack of enthusiasm in seeking an answer to the fundamental riddles haunting homeopathy. I feel very sorry. They loose- not me.

A few years back, during the initial phase of my MIT work, I happened to be introduced by some friends to a senior CCRH member while participating a public function Kerala. Out of courtesy, when I told him that I am into some research works on homeopathy, he raised his voice as if to attract attention of people around, and asked me: “How can you do any research in homeopathy without permission from CCRH? What is your qualification to do research? There is a lot of official formalities before anybody undertake any research in homeopathy. You cannot do research”. I kept silent, feeling pity for his ignorance and misunderstanding about ‘research’. For these people, ‘research’ means preparing a ‘project’, getting ‘sanction’ and some ‘funding’ from public exchequer and sharing it in between them, cooking up a ‘report’, and getting a PhD. Present response from CCRH also shows nothing has changed there, except people on chairs.

I will not disturb you any more, sir.




A few years back, during the initial phase of my MIT work, I happened to be introduced by some friends to a senior CCRH member while participating a public function Kerala. Out of courtesy, when I told him that I am into some research works on homeopathy, he raised his voice as if to attract attention of people around, and asked me: “How can you do any research in homeopathy without permission from CCRH? What is your qualification to do research? There is a lot of official formalities before anybody undertake any research in homeopathy. You cannot do research”. I kept silent, feeling pity for his ignorance and misunderstanding about ‘research’. For these people, ‘research’ means preparing a ‘project’, getting ‘sanction’ and some ‘funding’ from public exchequer and sharing it in between them, cooking up a ‘report’, and getting a PhD. Present response from CCRH also shows nothing has changed there, except people on chairs.


By handling my suggestion for co-operation in a purely OFFICIAL way, CCRH has spoiled a big opportunity for scientific advancement of homeopathy. Their ‘official’ response has demonstrated their inertia, disinterest and lack of enthusiasm in seeking an answer to the fundamental riddles haunting homeopathy. I feel very sorry. They loose- not me.


I am not a candidate for PhD, or I am not requesting for any FUNDING. I am not an APPLICANT for any favor from any AUTHORITY. I do not think there is any EXPERT associated with CCRH who can REVIEW and evaluate MIT concepts to accept or reject it. I HAVE MY OWN WAYS AND MEANS FOR GOING FORWARD WITH MIT.

MIT concepts will stay here if it is right, even without any ‘recommendations’ and certifications from any ‘expert committee’ or ‘authority’.


It is now obvious that we need not expect an INITIATIVE or proactive role from CCRH on MIT. We have to submit ‘application’ when ‘notification’ is published. If our ‘application’ complies with terms and conditions, our ‘concept paper’ will be ‘reviewed by expert committee’ and ‘as per their recommendations, future actions will be taken up’. It is the ROUTINE procedure for getting CCRH FUNDING. I would prefer to stay away from this process, as I do not qualify as a “scientist associated with reputed organizations, preferably of Government/non-profit making”. That would save me from the humiliation of getting my ‘application rejected by experts’ for not complying with official ‘terms and conditions.



ccrh.delhi <ccrh.delhi@gmail.com>

Dear Chandran K C,

Thank you for drawing attention to a concept, which may explain the mechanism of action of homoeopathic medicines.

The Council will shortly advertise for calling Expression of Interest (EoI) to undertake fundamental/basic research studies in collaboration with scientists associated with reputed organizations, preferably of Government/non-profit making.

The advertisement will appear in national daily newspaper(s) and uploaded on Council’s website www.ccrhindia.org. The documents will contain detailed terms and conditions, process of collaborations etc.

If you can take up study at your institute (if non-profit) or in association with other reputed Government/non-profit organizations, you may submit the concept paper after EoI notification. The concept paper submitted by you will be reviewed by the Expert Committee and subject experts, and as per the recommendations of the committee, future action will be taken up.

Dr. Anil Khurana
Assistant Director (H)
Central Council for Research in Homoeopathy
New Delhi


In order to comply with the ‘terms and conditions’ of CCRH to submit EOI, I have to be a “scientist associated with reputed organizations, preferably of Government/non-profit making”.

I can submit “concept paper” for EOI only if I “can take up study at my own institute (if non-profit) or in association with other reputed Government/non-profit organizations”.

Even if I submit a “concept paper” that comply with “terms and conditions” of CCRH, that “concept paper will be reviewed by the Expert Committee and subject experts, and as per the recommendations of the committee, future action will be taken up.”



Drug relationship is a subject about which most homeo practitioners are very much worried and confused. Some practitioners very much rely upon ‘drug relationships’ even in deciding their treatment protocols. Concepts such as ‘complementary’, ‘inimical’, ‘antidotal’ etc. are frequently utilized in everyday practice. Some doctors even deviate from the theory of similimum, due to their over indulgence with ‘drug relationship’ protocols. When prescribing a drug based on its so-called complementary relationship to the earlier prescriptions, we forget to consider whether it is a similimum by totality of symptoms. Yet, we call it ‘classical’ homeopathy.

When searching through the literature and authorities regarding drug relationships, it will be seen that no serious scientific studies have been done on this subject. Most of the drug relationships are proposed by empirical clinical observations of practitioners, and not corroborated by scientific studies or evidences. More over, practitioners who are not much bothered over this relationships between drugs swear that their experiences prove otherwise. Some homeopaths prescribe so-called inimical drugs even simultaneously or alternatingly, and get expected clinical results.

We have already seen during our previous deliberations that in homoeopathic potencies above 12C, there is no chance of drug molecules to exist. These preparations contain only hydrosomes or molecular imprints of constituent molecules of the drug substance subjected to potentization. Molecular imprints are only nanocavities formed by supra-molecular clustering of water and ethyl alcohol. Chemically, they contain only water and ethyl alcohol molecules. Even a given sample of homeopathic potency contains hundreds of types of individual imprints, representing the diverse types of molecules contained in the original drug substance. It is clear that they co-exist without disturbing or influencing each other in anyway, same time preserving their individual properties as molecular imprints of specific drug molecules.

1. This clearly indicates that highly potentized homoeopathic preparations cannot chemically interact with each other, since they contain no drug molecules. Obviously, they are not likely to engage in any mutual interaction within or outside the organism. They can never antidote or destroy each other.

2. Same time, the case of mother tinctures and preparations below 12c potencies may be totally different. They contain crude drug molecules, which can interact with each other due to their chemical properties. The concept of ‘drug relationships’ may be valid in the case of these low potencies. Low potencies may be more active than crude drugs, since they contain free molecules and ions.

3. Low potencies and mother tincture of a drug may antidote higher potencies of same drug, due to the interaction with the hydrosomes which act as counteractive complementary factors to each other.

4. Same way, low potencies and mother tinctures of a drug may antidote higher potencies of another drug that may contain similar constituent molecules, due to the interaction with the hydrosomes having counteractive complementary factors relationship. Obviously, drugs containing similar molecules may have more or less similar symptomatology during drug proving.

5. Higher potencies of a drug may antidote the physiological effects of low potencies and mother tinctures of same drug, due to the interaction with the hydrosomes acting as counteractive complementary factors.

6. Same way, higher potencies of a drug may antidote low potencies and mother tincture of another drug, that may contain similar constituent molecules, due to the interaction with the counteractive complementary factors contained in the higher potencies.

If there is similarity only between certain types of constituent molecules of two drugs, partial antodoting is possible. That means, molecules having configurational similarity only are subjected to antidoting by this way. Such drugs will have partially similar symptomatologies.

We should be aware of the possibility of dangerous chemical interactions that might result between the constituent drug molecules of different drugs, when we mix or administer two or more mother tinctures and low potency preparations together.


Yesterday, a young homeopath jumped in to my wall and posted:

“You are not a homeopath- only a commercial person. What you write about homeopathy is mere crap”.

Whole night, I was thinking about this reward I got from a person belonging to the young, ‘elite’ generation of homeopathy. It really pained me a lot, as I am an ordinary human being with ordinary emotions and reactions.



Practice homeopathy with MINIMUM theory, with minimum ‘DON’TS’. Practice it with confidence- without any fear and forebodings. COLLECTING ‘COMPLETE SYMPTOMS’ AND SELECTING SIMILIMUM IS THE MOST IMPORTANT SKILL YOU SHOULD MASTER. Use only 30C. Do not hesitate to repeat frequently. Do not hesitate to change remedies as indicated by symptoms . Do not worry about ‘single-multiple’ drugs. Do not worry about ‘drug relationships’. Do not worry about ‘miasms’. Do not worry about ‘aggravations’ and ‘bad effects’ of potentized drugs. you will definitely succeed!




from: Similimum <similimum@gmail.com>
to: ccrh@del3.vsnl.net.in
date: Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 11:11 AM
subject: Appointing a sub-committee for considering the viability of MIT concepts- requested- regarding
mailed-by: gmail.comFrom


Chandran K C
K C House, Kovunthala.
Sreekandapuram -670631
Kannur, Kerala


Sub: Appointing a sub-committee for considering the viability of MIT concepts- requested- regarding

I have been proposing a scientific hypothesis regarding a scientific model for biological mechanism of homeopathic therapeutics, which is known as MIT concepts.

Homeopathy cannot advance further as a medical science without accepting MIT concepts as an integral part of its theoretical and practical framework, because it is the most perfect, rational and scientific explanation for homeopathy.

MIT is not ‘just another’ brand or school competing for appropriating a share in the homeopathic market, already saturated with and spoiled by various commercial brands and schools. MIT is only a scientific explanation of homeopathy. An advanced phase in the historical evolution of homeopathy.

According to MIT concepts, active principles of potentized drugs are MOLECULAR IMPRINTS or HYDROSOMES, which are nanocavities engraved into water-ethyl alcohol supramolecular matrix through a peculiar process called POTENTIZATION. Potentization actually involves ‘host-guest’ molecular interactions exactly similar to that is commonly utilized by polymer chemists in preparing molecular imprinted polymers. Only difference is, homeopathy uses water-ethyl alcohol mixture as imprinting medium, where as polymer chemists use polymers.

Any potentized drug contain diverse types of molecular imprints representing diverse types of individual constituent molecules being part of drug substance used for potentization. By acting as ‘artificial key holes’, these individual molecular imprints can bind to specific pathogenic molecules having conformational affinity, there by relieving biological molecules from pathological inhibitions they are subjected to in disease conditions. This is the exact biological mechanism of homeopathic cure.

I have written hundreds of articles explaining diverse aspects of this concept, which are attached herewith

You can also see my facebook pages where these concepts are actively being discussed as well as my blogs

I would request CCRH to urgently consider MIT concepts seriously. A sub-committee of experts should be appointed to look into its viability and implications, and recommend future course of actions and research projects on MIT. I shall be always available to co-operate without any personal reservations or interests, if you ask me to do so.





Chandran K C


from: Rajkumar Manchanda <rkmanchanda@gmail.com>
to: “Dr.Debadatta Nayak” <drdnayak@gmail.com>,
Anil Khurana <anil23101961@gmail.com>
cc: Chandran K C <similimum@gmail.com>
date: Sat, Aug 31, 2013 at 8:06 PM
subject: Fwd: Appointing a sub-committee for considering the viability of MIT concepts- requested- regarding
mailed-by: gmail.com
signed-by: gmail.com

Dear Anil,

Pl look into this aspect as requested.

Dr Raj Manchanda



I have submitted MIT concepts before CCRH not for VALIDATION. I do not think CCRH is an ‘authority’ equipped to VALIDATE or JUDGE my scientific explanation of homeopathy. VALIDATION of MIT hypothesis has to be done by scientific community. CCRH can of course play a big role in designing, organizing and conducting scientific experiments based on MIT concepts, and presenting it before the scientific community for VALIDATION. If CCRH authorities realize its importance and act accordingly, it will be a great boost to MIT as well as homeopathy at large.

Whether CCRH responds positively to my request or not will no way affect my works. Even if they throw away MIT concepts into waste basket judging it worthless and unacceptable, it will not change my course. Court of final judgement is TIME. Let future advancements in scientific knowledge judge whether MIT is right or wrong!


Understanding LIGANDS and RECEPTORS is very important in understanding my scientific explanation of the biological mechanism involved in SIMILIA SIMILIBUS CURENTUR.

In biochemistry and pharmacology, the term ligand is used to indicate a small molecule that binds to a biomolecule to form a molecular complex complex with to serve a biological purpose.

In most cases, a ligand is a signal triggering molecule, that binds to a site on a target protein .

The binding between ligands and target molecules occurs by intermolecular forces, such as ionic bonds, hydrogen bonds and van der Waals forces. The binding is usually reversible, and molecular complex undergoes dissociation in due course.

When a ligand binds to a receptor protein, it alters the chemical conformation or three dimensional shape of the receptor. The functionality of protein moleculevis always determined by its three dimensional conformation.

Ligands include substrates , inhibitors ,activators, and neurotransmitters.  A ligand that can bind to a receptor, alter the function of the receptor and trigger a physiological response is called an agonist for that receptor.

A ligand that can bind to a receptor, but cannot trigger a physiological response, is called as antagonist of that receptor. Antagonist can block the receptor from binding to its agonists, there by leading to inhibition of the receptor. This phenomenon plays a big role in pathology and drug actions.

Molecular imprints of ligands as well as drug molecules having identical conformations can act as artificial binding sites for antagonists that have caused receptor inhibitions. Since potentized drugs selected as similimum contain molecular imprints of drug molecules having similar conformation, they effectively bind to the antagonists of receptors and thereby remove the inhibitions.

This is the biological mechanism involved in similia similibus curentur.


In biochemistry, a RECEPTOR is a molecule usually found on the surface of a cell, that receives chemical signals from outside the cell. When such external substances bind to a receptor, they direct the cell to do something, such as divide, die, or allow specific substances to enter or exit the cell.

Receptors are protein molecules embedded in either the cell’s surface membranes, in the cytoplasm, or in the cell’s nucleus, to which specific signaling molecules may attach. A molecule that binds to a receptor is called a LIGAND. A ligand can be a peptide or another small molecule such as a neurotransmitter, hormone, pharmaceutical drug, or toxin.

Various types of receptors are found in a typical cell. Each type of receptor is linked to a specific biochemical pathway, and binds only certain ligand shapes, similarly to how locks require specifically shaped keys to open. When a ligand binds to its corresponding receptor, it activates or inhibits the receptor’s associated biochemical pathway.

When a ligand binds to its specific receptor, the three-dimensional shape or conformation of the receptor molecule undergoes changes. This alters the shape at a different part of the protein, changing the interaction of the receptor molecule with associated biochemicals, leading in turn to a cellular response mediated by the associated biochemical pathway. However, some ligands called antagonists merely block receptors from binding to other ligands without inducing any response themselves. Such blocks will INHIBIT the receptors, leading to derangement of related biochemical pathways amounting to a state of PATHOLOGY.


Molecular Imprints of biological LIGANDS prepared by homeopathic potentization can act as ‘artificial binding sites’ for any molecular ANTAGONIST that bind to and inhibit its RECEPTORS and produce diverse types of diseases. As such, these molecular imprints could be used as therapeutic agents for removing molecular inhibitions of various biological receptors that underlie various disease conditions. Molecular Imprints of biological LIGANDS could also be used to remove the pathological ‘off-target’ inhibitions they produce. This knowledge will pave the way for developing of a whole new range of target specific MOLECULAR IMPRINTED remedial agents against various types of diseases, by potentizing hormones, neurotransmitters, neuromediators, cytokines, immunoglobulins, interleukins, interferons, signalling molecules, transcriptor factors etc etc.

I can foresee a great revolution this knowledge is going to produce in coming days in PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY as well as modern MOLECULAR MEDICINE.


According to scientific view, the material world and its laws are fully knowable, that our knowledge of the laws of nature, tested by experiment and practice, is authentic knowledge having the validity of objective truth, and that there are no things in the world which are unknowable, but only things which are as yet not known, but which will be gradually disclosed and made known by the efforts of science and practice.


“Matter is that which, acting upon our sense-organs, produces sensation; matter is the objective reality given to us in sensation. Matter, nature, being, the physical-is primary, and spirit consciousness, sensation, the psychical-is secondary.”


According to scientific world outlook, matter, nature, being, is an objective reality existing outside and independent of our consciousness. Matter is primary, since it is the source of sensations, ideas, consciousness, and consciousness is secondary, derivative, since it is a reflection of matter, a reflection of being. Thought or consciousness is a product of matter which in its development has reached a high degree of
perfection, namely, of the brain, and the brain is the organ of thought; and therefore one cannot separate thought from matter without committing a grave error in his perceptions.


According to scientific world outlook, this world is by its very nature material, and the multifold phenomena of the world constitute different forms of matter in
motion. The interconnections and interdependence of phenomena are a law of the development of moving matter, and the world develops in accordance
with the laws of movement of matter and stands in no need of a “universal spirit.”


I feel like crying to hear somebody saying that he understood the “sole basis” of my scientific explanation of homeopathy is “schusslers homoeopathy”!

Mr. Vikram kalra commented my post: “Whatever you are saying , it’s the sole basis is schusslers homoeopathy in which basic component of body act as medicine, it is micro supplement in circulation which cures and whose derangement leads to indisposition and later on disease.”

Excuse me, Mr Vikram Kalra. I fear you grossly misunderstood my concepts, or consciously misinterpreted me. The modern scientific BIOCHEMISTRY I am talking about has nothing to do with the so called pseudo-scientific ‘biochemistry’ of Schussler.


Many homeopaths believe and argue that homeopathic drugs act ‘dynamically’ on ‘vital force’, through ‘nerves’ and ‘mind’.

They should know, many in vitro studies conducted in reputed science laboratories using samples of biological molecules and tissues extracted out of living bodies have proved beyond any doubt that potentized drugs act even in the absence of nerves, nerve cells or ‘mind’, as any other ordinary chemical interactions. Those studies show that action of homeopathic drugs happens through a ‘biochemical’ mechanism, without any involvement of nerves, mind, vital force or dynamic force.

But homeopaths feign ignorance, and continue to ‘blindly believe’ that our drugs act upon nerves, ‘mind’, and vital force as a ‘dynamic energy’. They seem to fear that homeopathy will collapse if these ‘blind beliefs’ are abandoned, since they consider them as ‘fundamental principles’ of homeopathy!


If you do not keep at least some values and principles that you cherish more than your life, and for which you will be ready even to die if need arises, your living becomes worthless and of no purpose.


Many homeopaths believe that since ‘psychosomatic
diseases’ originate from MIND, they are outside the realm
of biochemistry. According to them, mind is something
‘immaterial’, ‘dynamic’ and ‘spirit-like’, and hence
mental phenomena cannot be explained in terms of
SCIENTIFIC knowledge. ‘Mind is beyond science’- they
say. And they talk about MIND as part of immaterial

The phenomena we call MIND never exist in the absence
of a MATERIAL BODY, and a highly complex central
nervous system being part of that body. MIND does not
exist free from the complex biochemical molecular level
interactions in the central nervous system, which actually
represents the highest stage of MATERIAL EVOLUTION on
earth. MIND can be influenced by material substances
such as drugs, which can modify the biochemical
processes in brain. Any mental activity is related with
production, transportation and interactions of some
CHEMICAL molecules in the body, that can influence the
whole physiological processes in the organism.

MOODS, FEELINGS, DREAMS- every phenomena we
associate with MIND happen through BIOCHEMICAL
PROCESSES in our nervous system. Some specific
chemical molecules are produced as part of those

CHEMICAL MOLECULES produced during mental
activities have specific TARGETS and specific
FUNCTIONS of their own. It is the actions of those
molecules on their specific targets that produce the
particular state of mind and its physiological processes.

When these chemical molecules being part of MENTAL
ACTIVITIES are produced in excess, or they are not
removed from the system in due course, they will
circulate in the body, BIND to unexpected OFF-TARGET
biological molecules, and lead to their INHIBITION. Such
‘off-target’ inhibitions caused by the neuro-chemicals
circulating in the body are the CAUSATIVE FACTORS pf
certain pathological conditions we call PSYCHOSOMATIC

Obviously, there is nothing ‘immaterial’ or ‘dynamic’ in
PSYCHOSOMATIC diseases. They are purely MATERIAL,
that could be treated by MATERIAL drugs.

PSYCHOSOMATIC DISEASES belongs to a class of
pathological conditions caused by INHIBITIONS of
biological molecules by the ‘off-target’ actions of
ENDOGENOUS molecules acting as pathogenic agents.


If my next generation does not remember me with love and gratitude even after my death, it means my life was a failure.


If you cannot think about life processes and diseases in terms of their underlying biochemical interations at molecular level, and know something about their complex molecular kinetics, you cannot understand anything I explain about the biological mechanism of homeopathic cure.

If you cannot think about drug substances in terms of diverse types of chemical molecules they contain, and know something about their interactions with biological molecules in our body, you cannot understand what I am saying about drug proving and drug symptoms.

If you cannot think about potentization as a process of molecular imprinting, and perceive potentized drugs in terms of diverse types of molecular imprints they contain, you cannot understand what I say about the scientific meaning of similia similibus curentur, selection of potencies, drug relationships, single-multiple drug issue, dosage, repetitions, suppressions, homeopathic aggravations and all such topics involved in homeopathic practice.


INHIBITIONS of biological molecules, especially PROTEIN molecules, such as enzymes, receptors, transport molecules, immune bodies, structural molecules etc, constitute a major class of DISEASES amenable to medical intervention.

Inhibitions of PROTEINS happen when their native three-dimensional conformations are changed by BINDING of exogenous or endogenous molecules on them, there by making them incapable of interacting with their natural ligands.

Homeopathy is especially suitable to deal with DISEASES arising from this class of molecular errors, since potentized drugs contain ‘molecular imprints’ that can act as ‘artificial binding sites’ for pathogenic molecules having functional groups with conformations complementary to the molecular imprints.



According to MIT view, PSORIASIS is caused by ‘off-target’ actions of antibodies generated in the body against various ‘alien proteins’ such as infectious agents of ITCH. As such, it is a MIASMATIC disease belonging to the PSORA. When these antibodies attack the cells of skin, misinterpreting them as pathogenic antigens, a series of biochemical process set in, resulting in inflammatory changes and hyperkaratinization of epidermal layers amounting to a state of PSORIASIS.

According to ‘immunological’ view proposed by modern researchers, psoriasis develops when the immune system mistakes a normal skin cell for a pathogenic agent, and sends out faulty signals that cause overproduction of new skin cells that appear as psoriatic lesions. This model also broadly fits to the MIT ‘miasmatic’ model, only difference being that ‘immunological model’ does not mention about the role of ‘antibodies’ formed against previous infections.

Other than skin, psoriasis can also cause inflammation of the joints, which is known as psoriatic arthritis. This similar to the arthritis produced by antibodies of streptococcus throat infections. Between 10% and 30% of all people with psoriasis also has psoriatic arthritis.

The cause of psoriasis and its molecular level pathology is not fully understood yet. Over and above immunological or miasmatic aspects, it is believed to have a genetic component also, and ‘genetic expressions’ leading to local psoriatic changes can be triggered by an injury to the skin, thereby attracting ‘mismatic’ antibodies into dermal cells.

Various environmental factors have been suggested as aggravating to psoriasis, including oxidative stress, mental stress, withdrawal of systemic corticosteroids, as well as exposure to various other environmental factors such as chemicals. All these factors create a favorable environment for the attack of dermal cells- keratinocytes’ by ‘miasmatic’ antibodies.

Existing hypothesis is that the disease as being an immune-mediated disorder in which the excessive reproduction of skin cells is secondary to factors produced by the immune system. T cells -which normally help protect the body against infection- become active, migrate to the dermis and trigger the release of cytokines such as tumor necrosis factor-alpha TNFα, which cause inflammation and the rapid production of skin cells. It is not yet clearly known what initiates the activation of the T cells. Antibodies generated against various alien proteins such as infectious agents entering the body may play such a role, through their off-target actions.

This immune-mediated or miasmatic model of psoriasis has been supported by the observation that various immunosuppressant medications can clear psoriasis plaques. However, the role of the immune system is not fully understood, and it has recently been reported that an animal model of psoriasis can be triggered in mice lacking T cells. Animal models, however, reveal only a few aspects resembling human psoriasis. Compromised skin barrier function has a role in psoriasis susceptibility.

Psoriasis is considered as a fairly idiosyncratic disease, since majority of cases of psoriasis may worsen or improve without any apparent reason. Studies of the factors associated with psoriasis tend to be based on small, samples of individuals belonging to hospital samples. These studies tend to suffer from representative issues, and an inability to tease out causal associations in the face of other unknown intervening factors. Conflicting findings are often reported in such studies. Nevertheless, the first outbreak is sometimes reported following a mental or physical stress, skin injury, and streptococcal infections, which attract ‘immune bodies’ to attack the certain skin cells, by mistaking them as pathogenic agents. Conditions that have been reported as accompanying a worsening of the disease also include infections, stress, and changes in season and climate. Certain medicines, including lithium salt, beta blockers and the antimalarial drug chloroquine have been reported to trigger or aggravate the disease.

Excessive alcohol consumption, smoking and obesity may exacerbate psoriasis or make the management of the condition difficult or perhaps these co-morbidities are effects rather than causes. Hairsprays, some face creams and hand lotions, are also considered to cause an outbreak of psoriasis. In 1975, Stefania Jablonska and collaborators advanced a new theory that special antibodies tend to break through into the lower layers of the skin and set up a complex series of chemical reactions, which comes very close to MIT interpretation of miasms as ‘off target actions’ of antibodies.

Psoriasis occurs more likely in dry skin than oily or well-moisturized skin, and specifically after an external skin injury such as a scratch or cut , which is known as Koebner phenomenon. This is believed to be caused by an infection, in which the infecting organism thrives under dry skin conditions with minimal skin oil, which otherwise protects skin from infections. The case for psoriasis is opposite to the case of athlete’s foot, which occurs because of a fungus infection under wet conditions as opposed to dry in psoriasis. This infection induces inflammation, which causes the symptoms commonly associated with psoriasis, such as itching and rapid skin turnover, and leads to drier skin, as the infecting organism absorbs the moisture that would otherwise go to the skin. All these observations authenticate the role ‘miasmatic’ antibodies producing ‘off-target’ inhibitions in certain biochemical process in skin cells, resulting in PSORIASIS.

Psoriasis has a large hereditary component, and many genes are associated with it, but it is not clear how those genes work together. Most of them involve the immune system, particularly the major histo-compatibility complex (MHC) and T cells. The main value of genetic studies is they identify molecular mechanisms and pathways for further study and potential drug targets.

Classic genome-wide linkage analysis has identified nine locations on different chromosomes associated with psoriasis. They are called psoriasis susceptibility 1 through 9 (PSORS1 through PSORS9). Within those loci are genes. Many of those genes are on pathways that lead to inflammation. Certain variations or mutations of those genes are commonly found in psoriasis.

The major determinant is PSORS1, which probably accounts for 35–50% of its heritability. It controls genes that affect the immune system or encode proteins that are found in the skin in greater amounts in psoriasis. PSORS1 is located on chromosome 6 in the MHC, which controls important immune functions. Three genes in the PSORS1 locus have a strong association with psoriasis vulgaris: HLA-C variant HLA-Cw6, which encodes a MHC class I protein; CCHCR1, variant WWC, which encodes a coiled protein that is overexpressed in psoriatic epidermis; and CDSM, variant allele 5, which encodes corneodesmosin, which is expressed in the granular and cornified layers of the epidermis and upregulated in psoriasis.

Genome-wide association scans have identified other genes that are altered to characteristic variants in psoriasis. Some of these genes express inflammatory signal proteins, which affect cells in the immune system that are also involved in psoriasis. Some of these genes are also involved in other autoimmune diseases.

Two major genes under investigation are IL12B on chromosome 5q, which expresses interleukin-12B; and IL23R on chromosome 1p, which expresses the interleukin-23 receptor, and is involved in T cell differentiation. T cells are involved in the inflammatory process that leads to psoriasis.
These genes are on the pathway that ends up upregulating tumor necrosis factor-α and nuclear factor κB, two genes that are involved in inflammation.
Recently the first gene directly linked to psoriasis has been identified. Studies have suggested that a rare mutation in the gene encoding for the CARD14 protein plus an environmental trigger was enough to cause plaque psoriasis, which is the most common form of psoriasis.

In psoriasis, immune cells move from the dermis to the epidermis, where they stimulate skin cells or keratinocytes to proliferate. Psoriasis does not seem to be a true autoimmune disease. In an autoimmune disease, the immune system confuses an outside antigen with a normal body component, and attacks them both. But in psoriasis, the inflammation does not seem to be caused by outside antigens, although DNA does have an immunostimulatory effect. Researchers have identified many of the immune cells involved in psoriasis, and the chemical signals they send to each other to coordinate inflammation. At the end of this process, immune cells, such as dendritic cells and T cells, move from the dermis to the epidermis, secreting chemical signals, such as tumor necrosis factor-α, interleukin-1β, and interleukin-6, which cause inflammation, and interleukin-22, which causes keratinocytes to proliferate.

The immune system consists of an innate immune system, and an adaptive immune system. In the innate system, immune cells have receptors that have evolved to target specific proteins and other antigens that are commonly found on pathogens. In the adaptive immune system, immune cells respond to proteins and other antigens that they may never have seen before, which are presented to them by other cells. The innate system often passes antigens on to the adaptive system. When the immune system makes a mistake, and identifies a healthy part of the body as a foreign antigen, the immune system attacks that protein, as it does in autoimmunity.

In psoriasis, DNA is an inflammatory stimulus. DNA stimulates the receptors on plasmacytoid dendritic cells, which produce interferon-α, an immune stimulatory signal (cytokine). In psoriasis, keratinocytes produce antimicrobial peptides. In response to dendritic cells and T cells, they also produce cytokines, such as interleukin-1, interleukin-6, and tumor necrosis factor-α, which signals more inflammatory cells to arrive and produces further inflammation.

Dendritic cells bridge the innate and adaptive immune system. They are increased in psoriatic lesions and induce the proliferation of T cells and type 1 helper T cells. Certain dendritic cells can produce tumor necrosis factor-α, which calls more immune cells and stimulates more inflammation. Targeted immunotherapy, and psoralen and ultraviolet A (PUVA) therapy, reduces the number of dendritic cells.

T cells move from the dermis into the epidermis. They are attracted to the epidermis by alpha-1 beta-1 integrin, a signalling molecule on the collagen in the epidermis. Psoriatic T cells secrete interferon-γ and interleukin-17. Interleukin-17 is also associated with interleukin-22. Interleukin-22 induces keratocytes to proliferate. One hypothesis is that psoriasis involves a defect in regulatory T cells, and in the regulatory cytokine interleukin-10.

All the factors detailed above strongly support the MIT model of PSORIASIS, according to which it is a disease caused by miasm of PSORA, or ‘off-target’ actions of antibodies generated in the body against various ‘alien proteins’ such as infectious agents of ITCH. Homeopathic treatment of psoriasis should be based on this perspective.



I would suggest homeopathic remedies selected on TOTALITY OF SYMPTOMS for ‘Sjogree Syndrome’. But, along with it, VARIOLINUM 30 should be given for long term, as this disease is caused by off-target actions of antibodies formed against EBV virus infections or MONONEUCLEOSIS (Kissing Disease), which belong the class of Herpesviridae a large family of DNA viruses, to which chicken pox virus and zoster virus also belong. I have even seen many cures produced by VARIOLINUM alone.


After the first intimation from Dr Raj Manchanda that Dr.Debadatta Nayak (drdnayak@gmail.com) and Anil Khurana (anil23101961@gmail.com) have been asked to “look into the aspects as requested” regarding my request for “appointing a sub-committee of experts to look into the viability and implications of MIT concepts, and recommend future course of actions and research projects”, there is no any further information from CCRH.

Still I am waiting for a response from CCRH authorities- be it POSITIVE or NEGATIVE.


If you cannot say an emphatic ‘NO’ to ‘ENERGY MEDICINE’ theories of all shades and colors, you cannot LEARN, PRACTICE and PROPAGATE homeopathy as a MEDICAL SCIENCE. You cannot effectively communicate with scientific community as equals, and say HOMEOPATHY IS SCIENCE- not faith healing or occult.

You should not forget, ENERGY MEDICINE is nothing about the ENERGY forms that we study in physics. They are talking about a mysterious HEALING ENERGY, which is IMMATERIAL, DYNAMIC, and acting without any MATERIAL medium. It is part of philosophy of DYNAMISM and VITALISM. ENERGY MEDICINE contradicts ALL fundamentals of physics, chemistry and life sciences

They talk about a mysterious MEDICINAL ENERGY, transferred into the potenizing medium as ELECTROMAGNETIC SIGNATURES, acting upon the VITAL FORCE through BIO-MAGNETIC RESONANCE even from a distance.

Energy medicine theories discredit the scientific credentials of homeopathy.


You cannot dream about making homeopathy SCIENTIFIC, and getting recognized as a MEDICAL SCIENCE, unless you are ready to abandon the UNSCIENTIFIC concepts of VITAL FORCE and DYNAMIC DRUG ENERGY. These concepts originated from the PRE-SCIENTIFIC world outlook of primitive man, and remain today as part of RELIGION and OCCULT.

What ever intellectual circus you play, SCIENCE never accepts VITAL FORCE and DYNAMIC ENERGY. ULTRA_SCIENTIFIC and FRINGE SCIENCE theoretical pretensions no way help in making them SCIENTIFIC.

Homeopaths should realize that VITAL FORCE and DYNAMIC ENERGY concepts are the greatest stumbling blocks that prevent homeopathy from getting recognized as a MEDICAL SCIENCE.

We have to explain homeopathy in scientific terms, using scientific paradigms, in a way fitting to the modern BIOCHEMISTRY, PHARMACOLOGY and LIFE SCIENCES, and prove it using SCIENTIFIC METHODS.


Only MIT can RATIONALLY answer the fundamental question “what is the active MATERIAL FACTOR of potentized drugs”, and propose a viable BIOLOGICAL MECHANISM for its therapeutic actions, in a way that could be subjected to validation by SCIENTIFIC METHODS.

Earlier the homeopathy community realize the importance and implications of MIT for the survival and advancement of homeopathy, the better. If you fail or hesitate by prejudices to understand and accept this wonderful concept, homeopathy will be the ultimate loser, NOT ME.


Please understand, by talking theories of ‘vital force’, ‘dynamic drug energy’, ‘electromagnetic drug signatures’, ‘biomagnetic field resonance’, ‘quantum entanglement’ , ‘spiritual healing’, ‘non-material drug power’ and all those NONSENSE, you are contributing nothing positive for homeopathy, but making it more and more INCOMPATIBLE with modern scientific knowledge system, and proving ourselves not worthy of any serious consideration as a SCIENTIFIC medical system.


Simply quoting those dogmatic APHORISMS of master, declaring ‘our master is the greatest scientist’, and poo-pooing about the ‘limitations of modern science’, is of no good any more, other than further alienating and marginalizing ourselves from mainstream scientific community.


Homeopaths should be aware of a hard truth: Without providing a DIRECT and convincing answer to the fundamental question “what is the active MATERIAL FACTOR of potentized drugs”, and without proposing a viable BIOLOGICAL MECHANISM for its therapeutic actions, in a way that could be subjected to validation by SCIENTIFIC METHODS, there is no hope for homeopathy to SURVIVE in an enlightened modern knowledge society.


Dr Rakesh Kumar asked me: “Why are you always making controversial statements”?

My views appear “controversial”, as I never blindly subscribe to any currently accepted norms, rules, laws and beliefs in homeopathy, or ‘follow’ any masters or their ‘scriptures’. I follow only scientific knowledge and my own rational thinking. I always ask WHAT, WHY and HOW of everything. That is why I admitted I am a SCIENTIFIC SKEPTIC- A SKEPTIC HOMEOPATH. I am engaged in a mission of REBUILDING homeopathy. We cannot rebuild something without DECONSTRUCTING first. Obviously, it will be a “controversial” mission.


Homeopath’s obsessiom regarding ‘single drug’ arises from his lack of knowledge about the molecular mechanism of how drug substances act upon living organism and produce symptoms.

Being trained in the pre-scientific environment of ‘vital force ‘ and ‘dynamic energy’ theories, he is totally ignorant about the modern advances in biochemistry and pharmacological chemistry, resulting in an inability to distinguosh between the concepts of ‘drug substances’ and ‘drug molecules’.

Even if he knows some biochemistry, he is never taught to think about life, disease, drugs and cure in terms of that scientific knowledge.

He fails to understand that it is the individual constituent ‘drug molecules’ that act up on the individual biological molecules, and not the ‘drug substance’ as a whole ‘single’ unit.

He fails to understand that if a ‘drug substance’ contains more than one type of ‘biologically active molecules’, scientifically that ‘drug substance’ has to be considered a ‘combination’ drug, not a ‘single’ drug.

By sticking to the lessons he learned from aphorisms of organon written 250 years ago before the dawn of modern biochemistry and pharmacological chemisty, he continues to believe that drug substances such as nux vomica and pulsatilla, which contains hundreds of types of biologically active chemical molecules, are ‘single’ drugs!

Unless homeopaths update their biochemistry, and learn to distinguish between ‘drug substance’ and ‘drug molecules’, they will continue to grope in the darkness of pre-scientigic hahnemannian era, reciting the aphorisms of organon and obsessed about the ‘laws and rules’ of homeopathy without understanding their real meaning and limitations.


As per my view, number of drugs included in a prescription is not a matter to worry about. What really matter is, whether you have included in your prescription ALL the diverse types of ‘molecular imprints’ required to remove ALL the diverse types of molecular inhibitions in your patient, that underlie the diverse groups of subjective and and objective symptoms expressed by him. If ‘single’ drug will provide the required molecular imprints, it is OK. If more drugs are needed to provide all necessary molecular imprints, I find nothing wrong in using more than one drug in same prescription. As molecular imprints never interact each other, there is no harm in combining all the required drugs together.

Whether you agree with me or not, I don’t mind!


Many homeopaths use multiple drugs privately either in the form of patented combinations or combination prescriptions. Certain others do it in the guise of ‘complementary’, ‘inter-current’, ‘layers’, ‘anti-miasmatic’, ‘antidoting’ or such convenient labels. Only difference is, some of them ‘mix’ drugs outside the body, where as others ‘mix’ inside the body. In either case, drugs act in the body as ‘combinations’. Same time, all of them pose publicly as ‘single drug’ prescribers, in order to prove they are ‘pure’, ‘classical’, ‘hahnemannian’ homeopaths!

They remind me of ‘prostitutes’ lecturing on virtues of ‘chastity’!


You have the right to say my ideas are ‘foolish and distressing’ if you think so. I will permit you to post it on my wall if you want. But I will ask you to explain WHAT are specific things in my ideas that you consider ‘foolish and distressing’, and WHY you think so. I will ask you to explain YOUR views about certain SPECIFIC fundamental questions of homeopathy I am trying to address. If you respond creatively, you are free to criticize, and we can continue discussions on anything and everything. But, if you ignore my repeated requests for explaining why you said my ideas are ‘foolish and distressing’, ignore what I am saying and try to move on to new topics unrelated with the original ones, I will first warn you, and then remove and block you from my lists. If you think you have nothing to learn new from others, and your only aim of coming to my page is to ‘teach me a lesson’, stay away from my pages.

Discussions should be healthy interactions of ideas, and creative criticism is part of that process. I want criticisms and discussions on my pages- not arguments and fights.


My post:




COMMENT BY RAVI PANDEY: “hahahah……….foolish explanation………..in order to make the “simplest” “most difficult” one……………we also know about molecules & biological targets…………………it is just an effort to prove yourself right even after prescribing two medicines……really disgusting & regretful…………sorry ….”

ME: Sir, as you have declared you “know about molecules & biological targets…..”, I would like to know your intelligent answers for following two basic questions:

1. What are the active principles of potentized drugs? Kindly note, question is about ACTIVE PRINCIPLES.

2. What is the biological mechanism by which potentized drugs produce cure? Kindly note, question is about BIOLOGICAL MECHANISM.

I am expecting a “simple’ and ‘not foolish’ explanation in the light of your “knowledge about molecules & biological targets…..”. Hope you would not make “simple things complex”.



If you ‘believe’ every words of ‘our great master’ who lived 250 years ago are scientifically right, and if you ‘follow’ only organon in your homeopathy practice, it is obvious that you will make yourself the best museum piece to decorate the historical archives of homeopathy. It is also very much obvious that you are pathetically illiterate in modern science, and you are not eligible to be called a ‘physician’,


Thinking facebook, talking facebook, learning facebook, eating facebook, drinking facebook, sleeping facebook, breathing facebook, living facebook. Literally, I live on internet. My only source of revenue now is by selling my Similimum Ultra Software on internet. And of course, it is not a bad job for me in terms of money and satisfaction!





Everybody strive to convince others that he is an ardent follower of SINGLE DRUG rule, even though privately he may be employing multiple drugs, seeking self-consolation in the “law of complementary relationships”. People who claim to follow the ‘single drug, single dose’ rule are held in high esteem by the profession, as true “classical homeopaths”. If any body boldly declares that he uses multiple drugs, he is accused of practicing “polypathic quackery” which is considered to be “unhomeopathic”. Of course, they may quote extensively from our great masters as supporting evidences for their opposition to multiple drugs.

We have to examine this “single drug versus multiple drug” issue with honesty and a rational scientific mindset. We should understand that there a lot of relatively darker areas in homeopathy, and obviously a lot of unanswered, incompletely answered and wrongly answered questions there. Once the fundamental questions of molecular mechanism of “similia similibus curentur” and “potentization” is scientifically explained, it will be easier to sort out such lesser issues logically.

Whatever our great masters have said earlier within the limitations of their space-time context, we will have to make a rational assessment of certain factors while trying to answer this important question on the basis of updated scientific knowledge.

Discarding the “dynamic” and “vitalistic” approaches of “classical homeopathy, MIT tries to analyze this issue from an entirely different perspective.

The so-called ‘classical homeopaths’ defines ‘single dug’ as any form of drug substance used as a sample for “proving”. Such a sample is called a ‘single drug’, even though it may be a complex mixture of several separate substances.

According to them, the criteria for “singularity” of a substance is not its molecular level constitution, but its “proving”. They think that when they consume any number of a substance as a ‘single’ unit, it will act in the body as ‘single’ substance! This subjective way of reasoning obviously lacks logic.

Any body with minimum understanding of material sciences know that drug substances interfere in the biochemical processes of the organism by their chemical properties, and that these chemical properties are determined by the individual constituent molecules contained in them. Only because we consume different types of molecules as a “single” unit, it cannot act as “single” drug in the bio-molecular processes.

For example, an alcoholic tincture extracted from the Nux Vomica plant is evidently a mixture of many types of enzymes, alkaloids, glycosides, phytochemicals, and other organic and inorganic molecules. It is obvious that tincture of nux vomica may differ in molecular constitution from sample to sample, depending up on whether they are prepared from whole plant, flowers, tender leaves, bark, fruit, or any other sources. No doubt, all these sample will be containing some molecules common to all parts of plant, even though their concentrations may vary. Over and above the natural organic contents, various elements and chemical molecules absorbed from the environment will also be part of that tincture. It may also contain various accidental contaminants and pollutants also. In spite of all these possibilities, we consider Nux Vomica tincture is a “single” medicinal substance, and we often talk about a “Nux Vomica personality” as such!

When we introduce a sample of Nux Vomica tincture into the living organism for ‘proving’, its constituent molecules are instantly subjected to various processes such as disintegration, ionization, hydration and certain chemical transformations. Individual constituent molecules are carried and conveyed through blood and other internal transport systems into the cells in different parts of the body. They interact with various enzymes, receptors, metabolites and other biological molecules inside the organism. These interactions are decided and directed by the specific properties such as configuration and charge of active groups of individual drug molecules, and their specific affinity towards biological target molecules. It is very important to note that Nux Vomica interact with different biological molecules, not as a singular entity, but as individual constituent molecules and ions. These individual drug molecules and ions are capable of binding to some or other biological molecules, effecting configurational changes in them, and thereby inhibiting the essential bio-chemical processes which can take place only with their presence and mediation. Such molecular inhibitions in various bio-chemical pathways result in a condition of pathology, expressed as a train of subjective and objective symptoms, due to the involvement of various neuro-mediator and neuro-transmitter systems.

The symptoms we get from the proving of Nux Vomica are in reality the results of diverse deviations in different bio-chemical processes and pathways, created by the constituent drug molecules in their individual capacity and specific configurational affinity. Each type of molecules contained in Nux Vomica binds only to a specific group of biological molecules, and creates their own individual groups of symptoms. Suppose we could completely remove all molecules of a particular alkaloid from a sample of Nux Vomica before it is used for proving. Naturally, during the process of proving, we shall be missing the groups of symptoms that should have been created in the organism by the molecules of that particular alkaloid. This type of proving may be called ‘differential proving’. By conducting such differential provings, we can learn about the particular state of pathology that may be attributed to individual constituent molecules contained in each medicinal substance. More over, this type of scientific differential provings may be utilized to study the biological effects of various constituent molecules of drug materials that we erroneously consider as single drugs. Such differential provings may disprove our mis-conceptions regarding ‘single drug’, at large. This is a subject that warrants serious attention from the part of homeopathic researchers and research institutions.

There are a few more points to be considered in association with the issue of ‘single drug’. Chances of drug samples used in proving being contaminated with various environmental particles and foreign molecules should be seriously considered here. Especially in the olden days of most of the drug provings, our knowledge regarding environmental pollutions and contaminations was very limited. During drug proving, molecules of such contaminants also would have obviously undergone proving, along with original drug molecules. Especially for homeopaths, who are convinced about the power of micro doses, this factor cannot be overlooked. The water, alcohol, sugar of milk etc., used in the process of preparing drugs for proving may also have various contaminants. The vessels, utensils, equipment, tools, air, and provers themselvs also may add their own contaminations. These contaminants and impurities also would have been subjected to proving along with original drugs, and their symptoms also included in our materia medica unknowingly, although we don’t take these factors seriously into account. We should be aware of the fact that the biological deviations created in the prover by these un-recognized foreign molecules are also included by us in the accounts of medicinal substances used for proving. It means that at least some of the symptoms we learn in the Materia Medica of a drug may not be actually related to that drug at all, but to the contaminants. This issue will have to be considered in more details later, when discussing about ‘materia medica’.

It is not at all realistic to imagine that the same drug sample of Nux Vomica used for proving is always used for preparing its potencies also. It may have been procured and prepared from another location, climate, environment, time and circumstances. All of these factors may necessarily influence their chemical constitution also. Contaminants and pollutants also differ with time, place and persons who handled it. Yet, we are obliged to call all these different samples as Nux Vomica, and use it as same drug, believing that it is a ‘single drug’!

In reality, potentized Nux Vomica we get now from pharmacies are prepared from samples very much different from the samples used for proving it two hundred years back. It might not necessarily be the same contaminations and foreign molecules which happen to be mixed with the drug during procurement and potentization. Entirely new type of impurities and foreign molecules, different from proven samples, shall definitely get mixed with drugs while potentizing. Naturally, these contaminants and foreign molecules also get subjected to potentization along with original drug molecules. It is evident that the homeopathic potencies of Nux Vomica we get from pharmacies contain the potentized forms of these new contaminant molecules also. In other words, they are mixed with potentized forms of these unknown substances, entirely different from those were subjected to proving. We cannot ignore the fact that we are not using potencies of same drug, that have been proved earlier and recorded in the materia medica, eventhough we call it with same name. It is composed of an entirely different mixture, much more different in molecular structure from the one subjected to original proving. We use the potentized form of this new combination, on the basis of symptoms produced by another combination earlier, using the therapeutic principle ‘Similia Similibus Curentur’. Is not this realization somewhat embarassing? Unless we provide convincing solutions to the ethical, theoretical and practical problems raised by this situation, it would be unfair to continue claiming that we are using ‘single drugs’!

The following facts are evident from this deliberation. At least some or other groups of symptoms attributed in the Materia Medica as that of a particular drug substance used for proving might not be related to it at all, but to the contaminants happened to be subjected to proving. Same way, in the potentized form, we are administering to the patient potencies of some additional molecules also in the, entirely different from those subjected to earlier provings. In short, Nux vomica we read in materia medica is different from Nux Vomica we use for treatment, even though both bear the same label. It means that while there will be most of the expected qualities in the potencies we use, there will definitely be the absence of at least some or other qualities we expect. Because, certain contaminant molecules subjected to proving and represented in the materia medica, might not be present in the samples used for potentization. It shows how much uncertain and unpredictable is the outcome of homeopathic medication in present situation.

Now, we have to consider the factor of foreign molecules which are likely to contaminate unexpectedly into the samples used for the commercial preparation of potencies. These foreign molecules have never been proved. We are totally ignorant about the different ways in which they might have interacted with the molecules of the original drug. We have no idea regarding the molecular inhibitions or the groups of symptoms they are likely to produce in the living organism. In spite of all these deficiencies, we apply the potencies of such unknown foreign molecules also, along with the original medicinal substance in to the body of a patient. Same time, we claim we are using ‘single drug’ only!

During our clinical practice, we would have experienced instances of removal of totally unexpected symptoms and diseases from the patient. Those symptoms might not be included in any text book of Materia Medica of the given drug. I suspect it may be the potencies of those unknown molecules entering the sample during potentization that is playing this trick.
The above facts more than expose the hollowness of our belief and often-repeated claim that we give a ‘single drug’ to our patient. It is undeniable that we are using medicines selected on the basis of similarity of symptoms, mixing it with potencies of some or other different types of molecules as well. This is an unpleasant situation which we cannot neglect. We should understand that we are giving the patient a mixture of “imprints” of different types of molecules, about some of which we have no idea at all. Same time, our medicines provide expected results when applied on the basis of ‘similia similibus curentur’. It shows that the presence of “imprints” of any unproved and unknown foreign molecules in the potentized drug in no way negatively affect the its effectiveness as a therapeutic agent.

During proving of drugs, the molecules and ions contained in them act individually up on different bio-molecular targets, on the basis of their configurational and charge affinity, and produce their own individual “groups of symptoms”. Like wise, when drugs are potentised, the constituent molecules and ions are individually subjected to a process of molecular imprinting in water-alcohol mixture, forming hydrosomes, that are exact counteractive configurational factors (CCF) of original molecules used as “guest” molecules in imprinting. That is why the presence of impurities which enter at the time of potentization never adversely affect the quality of the potencies of original drug. All the potencies, that we consider as single medicine are in realty a mixture or combination of “molecular imprints” of different types of independent molecules and ions, which never interact with each other in potentized form. This revealation prove that there is no harm to the “molecular imprints” of original drug molecules contained in the potencies, even if “imprints” of any foreign molecules happen to be mixed with them, deliberately or otherwise. More over, when introduced into the organism, these “molecular imprints” interact with biological molecules in their individual capacities, on the basis of configurational affinity. Since molecules and ions are subjected to molecular imprinting in their individual capacities, and they cannot interact with each other in that form, there is no chance of happening any harm, by mixing two or more samples of potencies of different drugs.

There is least possibility of any constituent molecules of drug substance remaining in their potentized forms above 12c. Only molecular imprints will remain. Hence, when higher potencies of two drugs are mixed together, there will be no chemical interaction taking place between them. In such a mixture, the molecular imprints of constituents of both samples will remain independent, without influencing each other, and with out losing their own individual qualities whatsoever.

What happens when such a mixture of two or more potentized drugs is introduced into the organism of a patient? Naturally, the molecular imprints of each constituent drug molecule interacts with biological molecules and pathological molecules individually, based on their specific configurational affinity. As counteractive configurational factors, they can bind only to the pathological molecules, which are similar to the original drug molecules that were used for imprinting. The biological molecules are thereby relieved from inhibitions caused by pathological molecules. This process ultimately removes the state of pathology, and relieves the subjective and objective symptoms of disease. A homeopathic cure is said to be effected. Due to their specific configuratioanal affinity, each type of molecular imprints can locate, identify and bind to exact molecular targets, whereas in the absence of exact molecular targets, these imprints stay neutral, since they are composed of mere water and alcohol molecules. The saying that ‘if a homeopathic potency is not similimum to a patient, it will not act’ is well explained here.

The question of acceptability of administering two or more homeopathic medicines in potentized form, by mixing, alternating, or simultaneously, should be discussed in the light of the above findings.

It is a very important fact that the drugs in the potentized form, which have no similarity with any group of symptoms shown by the patient, will not be able to create any sort of reaction in the living organism. Chemically, potentized drugs being only a mixture of alcohol and water, their chemical properties will remain confined to that molecular structure. Therefore, when we mix homoeopathic potencies of different drugs together, there is no chance for any chemical interactions to take place. More over the configurational properties of the diverse types molecular imprints contained in them are not in any way destroyed by this mixing.


I would criticize anything or anybody ONLY ÀFTER studying it deeply and understanding it well. And my criticism will be on specific points, analyzing it and explaining clearly why I disagree. According to my view, nobody is above criticism, since nobody is 100% right on everything he say or do. I will welcome anybody criticising me, if you do it after understanding what I say, make the specific points of disagreement clear, and explain why you disagree. If you criticize or argue with me without understanding or even trying to understand what I say, you will be dismissed.


It is OK if “the cat catch rat though the colour is white or black” is the philosophy of those who are interested ONLY in the money they could ‘catch’ by ‘practicing’ anything under the label of homeopathy, without any interest in knowing HOW HOMEOPATHY WORKS. They should remember, not only cats, snakes also catch rats!

They belong to the class of people who never ask anything about WHAT-HOW-WHYof anything, and are satisfied if they get some money from it- only in catching rats.

According to them, man need not have worried about laws of gravitation until he is getting enough apples to eat, we need not worry whether sun revolves around earth or earth revolves around sun until we get regular day and nights, ! We need not worry what we are eating or how our foods nourish our body so far as our belly is full! All scientific researches are unnecessary! FANTASTIC!



“From the actual stand of physics today the explanation is this: by diluting and by dynamisation the remedies, we get rid of the outer shell of the matter, so the inner parts of the substance, which are called “quarks” in physics, and “spirits” in the divine language can get free.

Then we have to use alcohol because alcohol it is also a spirit (spirits) which attracts and hold those spirits (quarks) freed. Otherwise they would leave the bottle ! Sugar has the same properties. Without sugar or alcohol no one could make remedies to keep for a longer time. These quarks are of an etherical nature, that is why they could have not been found or measured so far by the physicians. They are beyond visible matter as well as your own soul or my soul, which is the place where homeopathy work. The soul is a human like body made of etherical substances, some call it also astral body. ”

The etheric body (soul) gets sick when he is missing etheric
substances, similar with the material body when you don’t get certain vitamins or minerals. This process of missing these substances can be done also by negative emotions, which are also part of the soul and not of the body, so any negative emotion can make a disturbance in the soul which lead to the missing of some etherical substance. Also our sins (mistakes) regarding the 10+2 commandaments make the soul sick.

By giving this missing etheric substance (remedy) to the etheric body (soul), this can be healed. So simple is this.

Homeopathic remedies are so efficient because they fix the problem directly in the etheric body, there is the main cause of the sickness ! Allopathy is trying the other way. Our flesh is dead without the soul, when the soul leaves the body during sleep, fainting, death, the body is dead. Anybody knows that.

It is the soul who controls everything in the body: all functions, hormons, immune system. He is the one who fix the body. Trying the heal the body only is wrong, it is the other way around, because not the body controls the soul but the soul controls the body.

The soul is actually the doctor of the material body, so if you heal the doctor he will heal the body himself. If you try to heal the body is wrong, because the body is dead and cannot heal the soul.

So in homeopathy you simple give a certain etheric substance to the etheric body as you give vitamins or minerals to the flesh body. That’s all.

Now, to understand the whole process better we have to know that the soul is being fed also by the etheric parts of the food. In the stomach we have the duodenum with 12 different compartiments. There the food is split in material, etheric and spiritual parts which they feed the body, soul and even the spirit. There are 4 compartiments for each level. The reason why microwaved food it’s so bad: because those high frequency destroy the shells of the matter so you loose the etherical and spiritual parts of the food. The same with very high and abrupt temperatures like the ones in food factories, but microwaves are worse. This processed food it will feed only the body, but the soul and the spirit will get hungry and weak, so you get sick after a while, because the body NEEDS this etheric food.

There is no substance or thing which has not these 3 parts: material, etherical and spiritual parts.

It might make a difference though if you want to understand this with a human brain or with a physician brain. I gave you the right explanation from the divine point of view put in simple words and also connected to physics. As soon as physics will be able to see and measure the soul and the quarks, you will see that I gave you the right explanation. But this will never happen !

So I hope, the explanation itself it is enough for you and you don’t require proofs, which nobody can give you at this very poor state of physics from today.

From the medical point of view the existence of the soul is proven daily by those thousands of cases which happen every day somewhere when somebody in coma or during anesthesia can see from above everything and remembers things which happen in the operation rooms. This is beyond any scientific explanation, and they do not even dare to touch this subject because they have no explanation.

From the scientific point of you the presence and energy of the soul can be measured by the Kirlian method.

Read this many times before putting any question, because I will not change a word to what I said, but if you will still would not understand what I mean I will give you some more explanations to the explanation.

As long as the science did not have any microscopes, they had very primitive and wrong explanations about the complexity of the matter. These have changed a lot after seeing some microbes and small animals in the microscope. After that there were many other stupid theories until they saw even more complicated things like the cell, dna. Then there was the atom, and they thought here it is over. After that the protons and neutrons and electrons. Now we are at the quarks, which are the parts which make out a neutron or a proton. So the theory of today it is basically the stupidity of tomorrow. And till now we have been on the material level, but from now on we move to the etheric level, which is impossible to see anymore with machines.”

MY COMMENT: I feel ashamed to know this man also is part of ‘homeopathic’ community! I have seen a lot of people among ‘homeopaths’ like this who think that ‘being scientific’ means simply spicing up their foolish ‘vital force-dynamic energy’ theoretical recipes by adding some words from physics or chemistry or even ‘quantum theory’! I dismiss them immediately once they appear on my pages, as they are a bit perverted and insane , living in their own worlds of philosophical delusions and fancies, and it is futile to argue with them.


I have seen a lot of people among ‘homeopaths’ who think that ‘being scientific’ means simply spicing up their foolish ‘vital force-dynamic energy’ theoretical recipes by adding some words from physics or chemistry or even ‘quantum theory’! I dismiss them immediately once they appear on my pages, as they are a bit perverted and insane , living in their own worlds of philosophical delusions and fancies, and it is futile to argue with them.



Renin or angiotensinogenase, is the key enzyme produced in kidneys that modulates body’s renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) that mediates volume volume of extracellular fluids such as blood plasma, lymph and interstitial fluid, as well as arterial vasoconstriction. Thus, RENIN regulates the body’s mean arterial blood pressure.

The enzyme renin is secreted by the kidneys from specialized cells called granular cells of the juxtaglomerular apparatus in response to stimuli such as decrease in arterial blood pressure or decrease in blood volume detected by pressure-sensitive cells known as baroceptors, a decrease in sodium chloride levels in the ultrafiltrate of the nephrons, or sympathetic nervous system activity, acting through the beta1 adrenergic receptors.

The renin enzyme produced in kidneys circulates in the blood stream and breaks down angiotensinogen secreted from the liver into angiotensin I.
Angiotensin I is further converted in the lungs by angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) into angiotensin II. Angiotensin II is a very potent constrictor of all blood vessels. It acts on the smooth muscle and, therefore, raises the resistance posed by these arteries to the heart. The heart, trying to overcome this increase in its ‘load’, works more vigorously, causing the blood pressure to rise. This is the essential dynamics involved in rise of blood pressure.

Angiotensin II also acts on the adrenal glands and releases Aldosterone, which stimulates the epithelial cells in the nephrotic tubules and collecting ducts of the kidneys to increase re-absorption of sodium and water, leading to raised blood volume and raised blood pressure.

Aldosterone also acts on the CNS to increase water intake by stimulating thirst, as well as conserving blood volume, by reducing urinary loss through the secretion of Vasopressin from the posterior pituitary gland, resulting in increased blood pressure.

In normal physiological conditions, once the reduced blood pressure is raised to the adequate level, production of RENIN in kidneys is stopped by a NEGATIVE FEEDBACK mechanism, where angiotensin II act upon the special ‘angiotensin II receptors’ on the cell membranes of juxtaglomerular apparatus of kidneys. By this process, level of RENIN in blood stream is maintained with in limits, thereby preventing hypertension. Same way, production of catecholamines such as adrenalin which also plays a role in inducing production of RENIN and maintaining blood pressure high, is stopped by negative feedback action of adrenalin upon adrenogenic receptors on cells of adrenal cortex.

A pathological state of RENIN-ANGIOTENSIN AXIS happens once the NEGATIVE FEED BACK mechanism controlling the production of RENIN is disturbed by inhibition of angiotensin II receptors and adrenergic receptors involved in FEEDBACK process. Such inhibitions may be caused by binding of some pathogenic molecules of exogenous or endogenous origin, having functional groups similar to angiotensin II or adrenalin, so that they can competitively bind to the receptors. This leads to elevated state of RENIN in the circulation, resulting in ESSENTIAL HYPERTENSION.

Modern allopathic drugs are targeted either to block the conversion of angiotensin I into angiotensin II by inhibiting the angiotensin converting enzymes, or blocking the angiotensin II receptors using potent drug molecules. Since such molecular inhibitions may necessarily lead to molecular errors in different essential biochemical pathways, modern antihypertension drugs are prone to produce harmful side effects.

According to MIT concepts, maintaining the plasma level of RENIN by controlling its production by facilitating unhindered NEGATIVE FEED BACK mechanism is the ideal way of treating hypertension without any harmful side effects. Inhibition of FEEDBACK mechanism should be removed by using MOLECULAR IMPRINTS of angiotensin II, adrenalin, or drug molecules having similar functional groups. Various drug substances such as RAUWOLFIA contains a number of bioactive chemicals like ajmaline, aricine, corynanthine, deserpidine lankanescine rauwolscine, rescinnamine, reserpine, reserpiline, isoreserpine, isoreserpiline, serpentinine, and yohimbine, which can inhibit the angiotensin and adrenogenic receptors. As such, POTENTIZED FORMS of such drugs will contain MOLECULAR IMPRINTS that can act as artificial binding sites for binding to the endogenous and exogenous pathogenic molecules which are the causative factors of HYPERTENSION.

According to MIT approach, potentized or MOLECULAR IMPRINT forms of ANGIOTENSIN II, ADRENALIN, CATECHOLAMINES and various DRUG SUBSTANCES that can produce hypertension in crude form will be ideal drugs for treating hypertension without any side effects.


HOMEOPATHY has an ‘applied’ as well as a ‘theoretical’ part.

We should approach homeopathy not as ‘applying’ some theories, but making theories for ‘explaining’ what is experienced and applied. Hahnemann developed homeopathy not by making theories first, but by observing and experimenting real objective phenomena of nature, and then making theories to explain what he observed.

Applied part of homeopathy is primary, and it represents the objective reality, where as theoretical part is only a subjective explanation of this objective reality. Even if subjective part is proved scientifically wrong, objective part will remain, because it represents truth. We can explain this objective truth in a different way, more correctly, more rationally and more scientifically. Theory of homeopathy may change, but truth of homeopathy will not change.

What we call ‘theory of homeopathy’ is essentially a SUBJECTIVE explanation hahnemann provided for his OBJECTIVE observations regarding a peculiar kind of relationship between ‘drug and disease’ and the phenomenon of cure on the basis of that relationship. We have to differentiate between these ‘objective’ and ‘subjective’ parts of homeopathy

Subjective or theoretical part of homeopathy is bound to have limitations, since it is based on the primitive forms of scientific knowledge available to hahnemann 250 years ago, when modern science was in its infantile stage of evolution.

When scientific community say ‘homeopathy is unscientific’, I will have to agree with that statement, in the meaning that ‘theory of homeopathy’ as it stands today is ‘unscientific’ and ‘scientifically implausible’. Many things in present theory of homeopathy are evidently incompatible with our most advanced and well proven scientific knowledge system.


STEVE BRIGGS messaged me just now: “You’re the most progressive minded homeopath dude I know. Take a bow. Now, get to work and get those double-blind peer reviewed tests happening!”



STEVE BRIGGS from Australia, who had earlier offered to bet ONE MILLION DOLLARS to me If I prove HOMEOPATHY OR MIT WORKS, and promised to sign an agreement for conducting experiments and to provide a bank guarantee within one week time, has just now messaged me as follows:

“Dude, I’ve just been informed by my accountant, calling from a beach resort in Hawaii (I could hear seagulls and lazy slide guitar in the background), and the bad news is that he’s emptied all my accounts into a Cayman Island account. In other words, I’m currently experiencing a rather disastrous personal financial shortfall. Sadly I will not be able to guarantee the ONE MILLION (Zimbabwe) DOLLARS. But the good news, sir, is that you can still go ahead and prove your theories! Isn’t that great? You win anyway!”


Steve Briggs, It is indeed a sad news. We loose a great opportunity, which according to your words, would have been a ‘great moment for science’, and of course for homeopathy. Let us hope your financial crisis will end soon. Any how, I am thankful to you for your generous offer. This is not an issue of personal winning or defeating. I want to prove homeopathy by scientific method. Science should win. Not me or you, sir


According to SCIENTIFIC METHOD, anything not explained and proved scientifically are labelled UNSCIENTIFIC.

I do not think everything ‘not scientifically proved’are ‘scientifically implausible’. If something ‘really exists’, it could be and should be scientifically explained and proved in accordance with scientific method. Until that happens, it should not be considered ‘scientifically implausible’.

There are many phenomena which really exists or WORKS, but not ‘still’ scientifically explained or proved. But they are not ‘scientifically implausible’. Many things we NOW call ‘scientific’ were not ‘scientific’ in yesterdays, since they were not explained or proved scientifically. Gravitation, electricity, magnetism and many phenomena existed and worked here for centuries without any scientific explamation or proving- but everybody really experienced it.

My request to scientific community is, do not label or cast aside homeopathy as ‘unscientific’ or ‘scientifically implausible’, only because it is presently explained using most unscientific and scientifically implausible theories. Do not ignore the ‘objective truth’ involved in homeopathy that is being proved through thousands of cures experienced by homeopaths everyday.

At least, wait for a scientific theory of homeopathy to evolve in near future.


It is the ‘matching’ between symptoms present in a patient and in the drug that matter- not the ‘mismatching’ between symptoms absent in the patient but present in the drug.

For example, you need not avoid pulsatilla only because ‘consolation amel’ is ABSENT in the patient, if all the symptoms present in the patient match with pulsatilla.

Same time, you should rule out pulsatilla if ‘consolation agg’ is PRESENT in the patient, even if all other symptoms indicate pulsatilla.

A prominent mental symptom that is PRESENT in the patient, but contraindicates the drug will by itself rule out that drug, even if all other symptoms agree.


It will be more realistic to say HOMEOPATHY IS A GREAT THERAPEUTIC ART that really WORKS, but not yet scientifically explained or proved, which could be and should be explained and proved by scientific methods in near future


It is really pathetic to see even PROMINENT homeopaths declaring “homeopathy is great science”, exposing their ignorance regarding WHAT IS SCIENCE.

Kindly tell me, sir, what are the ACTIVE PRINCIPLES of potentized drugs we use? What is the BIOLOGICAL MECHANISM by which potentized drugs act up on the organism? If you can answer these two basic questions in SCIENTIFIC TERMS, in a way fitting to the scientific knowledge system, I will be very happy to agree with your opinion “HOMEOPATHY IS GREAT SCIENCE”. If you cannot, your opinion will remain wishful thinking of a dogmatic homeopath.


As per the existing state of affairs, it is wrong to say homeopathy is MEDICAL SCIENCE, if we use the term ‘science’ in its exact scientific meaning.

I would prefer to say, homeopathy is a ‘therapeutic art’ based on objective observations, and practically proved by experiences to be WORKING, but so far there is no SCIENTIFIC EXPLANATIONS regarding what are the ACTIVE PRINCIPLES of potentized drugs, or what is the BIOLOGICAL MECHANISM by which it works.

Homeopathy will become a MEDICAL SCIENCE only when these fundamental questions are explained and PROVED by scientific methods.

Through MIT concepts, I am proposing for the first time in history a SCIENTIFIC WORKING HYPOTHESIS for homeopathy, which has to be proved by scientific methods to make homeopathy a MEDICAL SCIENCE.


SIMILIMUM is a drug that contains some constituent chemical molecules having functional moieties similar to pathogenic molecules involved in the DISEASE we are trying to prescribe for, so that we can use the MOLECULAR IMPRINTS of those drug molecules to CURE the disease by selectively binding to the pathogenic molecules by complementary conformational affinity. MATCHING of drug symptoms and disease symptoms is only ONE of the ways to identify SIMILIMUM.


I do not think MENTALS are essential for selecting similimum. Even PARTICULARS, if they are ABNORMAL and well qualified with peculiar ACCESSORIES, will lead us to right similimum. It is the PECULIAR COMBINATIONS of symptoms we consider that matter, not whether they are MENTAL or PHYSICAL.



A case of 8 yr old girl, diagnosed as ‘cyclical vomiting
syndrome’ at Pariyaram Medical College, Kerala.

Recurring attacks of vomiting and nausea since one year,
under allopathic treatment without remarkable
improvement. No abodominal pain or headache. Mother
is a chronic migraine patient. Vomiting episodes starts in
morning after breakfast, continues 1-2 hours till the girl
gets exhausted. Had to be hospitalized and iv fluids given
on many occasions.

Episodes recurs every week, normally on mondays. Aversion to light and sounds during episodes. Drinks cold water frequently, and want to wash face with cold water. Sensitiveness to light and abnormal smells appears as a warning signal 2-3 hrs before the episode starts. During vomiting episodes, she complains
about a sensation of splinter sticking in the throat.
Always very much hurry (hurried movements, hurried
talking, hurried eating), anxious about going school and
studies, fear that she has serious diseases(asked me
many times, ‘uncle, do I have cancer?’), Craving for
sweet things(ice creams, chocolates).

Once I completed case taking, I was sure the girl needs
ARG NIT. On repertorizing with QUICK PICK tool of
Similimum Ultra software also, ARG NIT came top as
similimum. ARG NIT 30 was given thrice daily for one
week, then twice daily for one month, followed by once
daily for two months. No episodes after the first week
itself. Now it is one year without any recurrence of that

Attacks comes on mondays and after breakfast indicates
some anticipatory factors related with going to school.
Anxiety about school lessons, hurry, photophobia during
attacks, desire cold water, desire cold bathing of face,
craving for sweets, apprehensions of serious diseases.

Above all, the peculiar sensation of ‘splinters in throat’
appearing only during attacks.

1. [Kent]Mind : ANXIETY
2. [Kent]Mind : HURRY
3. [Kent]Mind : ANTICIPATION, complaints from
4. [Kent]Stomach : DESIRES : Cold drinks
5. [Kent]Stomach : VOMITING
6. [Kent]Eyes : PHOTOPHOBIA
7. [Kent]Mind : SENSITIVE, oversensitive : Noise, to
8. [Kent]Throat : PAIN : Splinter : As from a
9. [Kent]Stomach : DESIRES : Sweets
10. [Kent]Mind : FEAR : Disease, of impending
11. [Kent]Face : WASH in cold water, desire to
12. [Kent]Generalities : BATHING : Cold : Amel

This is a very simple case from homeopathic point of view, for which any homeopath can prescribe without much effort. But for the ‘specialists’ of modern medicine at that famous medical college, it proved to be a very ‘difficult’ case, which they failed to cure even after treating for one year. It is in this type of cases homeopathy shows its superiority over allopathy, but allopaths will not accept it was cured by homeopathic drugs. They will say, it was not cured by homeopathic drugs, but by ‘placebo effects’. Why allopathic drugs given for one year did not show at least this ‘placebo effect’, if not medicinal effect?

When the parents of this child later met the doctor who treated the girl at the medical college for one year, they told him the child was cured by homeopathy. He laughed sarcastically, and told them ‘spontaneous remissions’ are possible in this type of cases, and the cure has nothing to do with homeopathy medicines. Nobody asked him why this ‘spontaneous remission’ did not happen during the whole year he has been treating the child. He further ‘educated’ them about the ‘unscientificness’ of homeopathy, and warned them against using it in future!


One thing most homeopaths would have noted during their practice is that ‘different approaches lead us to different prescriptions’. Different homeopathic prescriptions are possible in any case. I am talking about successful prescriptions. You can understand this phenomenon only it you understand MIT concepts of molecular imprints of ‘functional moieties’ of drug molecules, and how they deactivate the pathogenic molecules by acting as ‘artificial key holes’.


I think many a excellent homeopathic prescriptions are spoiled only due to our ‘theoretical’ hesitation to repeat the doses in adequate intervals, and these failures are wrongly attributed to ‘wrong similimum’ or ‘wrong potency’ selection. We could have avoided such failures by repeating the doses frequently so as to maintain the drug action at optimum levels to effect a complete cure.

My concepts regarding ‘repetitions’ come from the scientific understanding of potentization as ‘molecular imprinting’ and the active principles of potentized medicines as ‘molecular imprints’ of constituent drug molecules used for potentization. You cannot follow me without understanding the concept of ‘molecular imprints’.

According to me, Molecular Imprints are the active principles of potentized drugs. These ‘molecular imprints’ bind to the pathological molecules having ‘complementary’ configuration, there by relieving biological molecules from pathological inhibitions and effect Cure. Same time,these ‘molecular imprints’ could be antidoted or deactivated by by molecules or ions having complementary configurations. That means, ‘molecular imprints’ we introduced into the body get deactivated by pathological molecules or other molecules having conformational affinity. Molecules and ions of vegetable alkaloids, enzymes, food additives, environmental toxins, infectious agents, bacterial-viral toxins and a host of other agents may antidote these ‘molecular imprints’. Hence, it is necessary to replenish the supply of ‘molecular imprints’ at frequent intervals to ensure a complete cure. That is my point.

The most quoted and most violated ‘cardinal principle’ of homeopathy is ‘single drug-single dose’. We use multiple drugs in private, and publicly pose as ‘single drug’ prescribers, masking with phrases such as ‘intercurrent’, complementary’, ‘antidote’, ‘anti-miasmatic’, or ‘layer prescriptions’. My point is, even so called ‘single’ drugs are not really ‘single’, but contains diverse types of ‘molecular imprints’.

Some ‘single drug’ prescribers would give a ‘single’ dose of say sulphur cm, and give plenty of biochemic salts or even biochemic combinations, and claim in public that they ‘cured’ the patient with ‘single’ dose of sulphur. Some people would give large doses of mother tinctures along with ‘a single dose of single drug’. Certain others would give a ‘single’ dose of selected similimum, and then frequent doses of ‘complementary’ drugs, for ‘relieving acute complaints’. Prescribing ‘anti-miasmatics’ are also not considered as a violation of ‘single’ drug principles. I am avoiding those who prescribe patented compound drugs from the purview of this discussion, since they are admittedly ‘multiple’ drug prescribers.

A complementary medicine may contain some extra molecular imprints that were not present in original similimum, and that may be helpful in the curative process.


You cannot master the art of CASE TAKING, if you did not master your REPERTORIES. A sound knowledge of repertorial rubrics related with important symptoms and their arrangements in your regularly used repertory will help you a lot in effective case taking.

Most homeopaths consider REPERTORY only as a tool for
finding similimum after case taking is over. For them, role
of repertory is limited to what is called ‘repertorization’. In
fact, repertories are great learning tools playing an essential role in mastering materia medica as well as the art of ‘Case Taking’, and should be utilized as such.

Key to the art of successful homeopathic case taking lies
in the skill of homeopath in converting ‘basic symptoms’
into ‘complete symptoms’ by adding with their ‘accessory
symptoms’, through intelligent interrogation, keen
observation and logical correlations. Without genuine
‘complete symptoms’, you cannot hope to work out a
case homeopathically to a reasonable similimum. This
skill has to be cultivated in students and budding
homeopaths by their teachers and senior colleagues.
Patients normally give only ’basic symptoms’ while
narrating their complaints. They would say, ‘I have a
headache’, ‘I have a pain in stomach’, ‘I have pain in
joints’ and like that. Such ‘basic symptoms’, even though
provide us valuable diagnostic hints, are of no use in
making a homeopathic prescription. We need
‘homeopathic symptoms’ or ‘complete symptoms’. A
‘basic symptom’ becomes a ‘complete symptom’ when it
is associated with its diverse ‘accessories’ such as
location, expression, sensation, modalities, concomitants,
extensions, alternations etc. Hunting these qualifications
or accessories for each and every ‘basic symptom’ is the
real art involved in ‘homeopathic case taking’.

For successfully hunting these ‘accessories’ of all ‘basic
symptoms’, and converting them into ‘complete
symptoms’, a homeopath should have a clear idea about
what are the possible ‘qualification’ for any given ‘basic
symptom’ presented by the patient. Without a reasonable
knowledge of matera medica and especially repertorial
rubrics, we cannot hope to attain that essential skill. That
is why I stress the vital importance of constant study of

Learning rubrics in your repertory is a most important part
of learning ‘Case Taking’. Those who are poor in
knowledge of rubrics in repertories will be poor in case
taking also. Case Taking is the most decisive step in
finding similimum. With out a well taken case we cannot
hope to find a similimum or get a cure for our patient. I
get hundreds of cases from homeopaths, requesting to
suggest similimum. It is not an exaggeration to say that
99% of those cases are very poorly taken from
homeopathic angle. Of course, they provide excellent
diagnostic information. But, we cannot find a
homeopathic similimum from diagnostic symptoms and
information alone. We need ‘complete symptoms’ for

Collecting ‘complete symptoms’ is the most essential part
of homeopathic case taking every homeopath should
master, if he really want to be a successful homeopath.
For that, we should have a clear idea about what are the
’complete symptoms’ we should look for in a given case
during case taking. In fact, repertories provide us an
exhaustive list of ‘basic symptoms’ and ‘accessory
symptoms’ we should explore in each and every disease
conditions and individuals. That is why I say, “master
your repertory if you want to master the art of case

I would request freshers and young homeopaths to
dedicate maximum available time in studying repertories,
so that we get an idea about the ‘complete symptoms’
we should look for in a patient coming to us with specific
complaints. Normally, patients will not voluntarily disclose
the ‘complete symptoms’- we have to interrogate and dig
them out. Actually, we cannot do any search or
exploration for anything, if we do not have a clear idea
about what we we are really exploring or searching for.

Most important aspect of ‘complete symptoms’ are
‘accessory symptoms’ associated with each ‘basic
symptom’. Unqualified ‘basic symptom’ such as
headache, dysmenooroea, abdominal pain or convulsions
are of no use for finding a similimum. These ‘basic
symptoms’ become valuable ‘complete symptoms’ when
they are associated with their peculiar ‘accessories ‘ such
as expressions, locations, sensations, modalities,
alternations, extensions and concomitants. Even a ‘single’
particular homeopathic symptom with all its ‘accessories’
can play a decisive or ‘pivotal’ role in determining a
similimum for the whole case. Searching for ‘accessories’
of each and every ‘basic symptoms’ described by the
patient- that is what we mean by ‘collecting complete
symptoms’. Without a reasonable knowledge of language
and arrangement of repertorial rubrics, we cannot
accomplish that task in a satisfactory way.

If you have a good Repertory Software, learning repertory as well as case takimgn becomes very simple, and more rewarding.

Materia Medica is the final court of verdict in deciding
similimum. Repertory is only an index to materia medica.
Repertory is materia medica arranged in a more
systematic and comparative format. By mastering
repertory, we are actually mastering materia medica.
Essentially, REPERTORIZATION is a comparative study of
materia medica of different drugs using indexed


By performing CASE TAKING and REPERTORIZATION simultaneously, we can save much time, same time making very accurate prescriptions. Innovative tools and platforms provided in my SIMILIMUM ULTRA SOFTWARE is very helpful in this regard.

I am reporting a case of pre-menstrual headache in a 35 yr old lady, cured by a drug selected using only ‘particular modalities’. I worked out the case and reachedsimilimum with in 5 minutes using Similimum Ultra Software.

The lady first told me she is having violent headache before ever menses. Using key-words ‘headache’, ‘menses’ and ‘before’, I instantly located following rubric and added to the RUBRIC BASKET of my software:

[Kent]Head : PAIN, headache in general : Menses :Before: – Acon., Agn., Alum., Am-c., Arg-n., Ars., Asar., Bell., Bor., Bov., Brom., Bry., Bufo., Calc., Calc-p., Calc-s., Carb-an., Carb-v., Caust., Cimic., Cinnb., Cupr., Ferr., Ferr-ar., Ferr-i., Gels., Glon., Graph., Hep., Hyper., Iod., Kali-p., Kreos., Lac-c., Lac-d., Lach., Laur., Lil-t., Lyc., Manc., Meli., Merc., Nat-a., Nat-c., Nat-m., Nit-ac., Nux-m., Nux-v., Ol-an., Petr., Phos., Plat., Puls., Sep.,
Sil., Stann., Sulph., Thuj., Verat., Vib., Xan., Zinc.

Next, she said she had vomiting along with this menstrual headache. Using key words ‘headache’, and ‘vomit’, I located and added this rubric:

[Kent]Head : PAIN, headache in general : Vomiting: – Ars., Asar., Bar-m., Con., Eug., Ferr-p., Glon., Iris., Lach., Lyc., Mez., Nux-v., Phyt., Sec., Sep., Verat.

Then I asked her, are there any factors that gave any relief to this headache. She told, she would get some relief if she lie in a dark room and get some sleep. I used key words ‘headache’ ‘sleep’ and ‘amel’, and got this rubric, and added it:

[Kent]Head : PAIN, headache in general : Sleep : Amel.: – Acon., Bad., Glon., Hell., Ign., Pall., Sep., Sil.

Then I used ‘head ache’ and ‘dark’ as key words, and located this rubric, added it to the RUBRIC BASKET:

[Kent]Head : PAIN, headache in general : Lying : In a dark room : Amel.:- Acon., Bell., Brom., Bry., Lac-d., Podo., Sang., Sep., Sil.

At this stage, I used QUICK PICK tool in my software to see which are the drugs that cover these FOUR particular symptoms. Only SEPIA was there!

Case taking, repertorization and prescribing were over by FIVE MINUTES!

Her facial expressions, body structure, way of talking, everything reminded me she is SEPIA. I decided to try SEPIA without further workout. SEPIA 30 was given TDS during headache, followed by BDS until next menstrual
period. Headache never recurred. This case taught me how simple it is to make a homeopathic prescription and get a nice cure.

I always search for PECULIAR COMBINATIONS of symptoms in my patients, which in most occasions lead to wonderful cures.

Kindly note, I am saying “peculiar combinations” of symptoms- not ‘peculiar symptoms’.

Here I am reporting a chronic case of backache in a 45
year old woman. A characteristic modality of her
backache was that she got relief by bending backwards.

She also revealed a very peculiar mental symptom: when
she was on her bed for sleep, suddenly a fear creeps into
her mind that if she sleeps, she will never wake up from
that sleep. She spent many whole nights without closing
her eyes due to this fear of falling into sleep. This
delusion has made her life miserable, even though she
did not reveal this fear even to her husband. All of them
considers it as ‘sleeplessness’.

I felt this is a very peculiar uncommon symptom that may
lead me to her prescription. I started to scroll through
repertories for this rubric, and finally located the following
one matching to her symptom:

[Kent]Mind : FEAR : Sleep : To close the eyes lest he
should never wake:- Aeth.

To my great surprise, I noticed that her peculiar modality
‘backache amel by bending backwards’ is also covered
by AETHUSA. See this rubric:

[Kent]Back : PAIN : Bending : Backward : Amel.:- Acon.,
Aeth., Am-m., Bell., Cycl., Eupi., Fl-ac., Hura., Lach.,
Petr., Puls., Rhus-t., Sabad., Sabin., Sil.

Satisfied with this wonderful combination of two rubrics, I
decided to ignore all other symptoms, and selected
AETHUSA as her similimum. Her backache and mental
agony was totally cured with AETHUSA. I used a few
doses of PULS also later, considering her constitutional

Making a perfect prescription using only two symptoms,
one mental symptom and a particular modality may seem
to be unbelievable- but here is the beauty of homeopathy.

This prescription demonstrates how PECULIAR COMBINATIONS of symptoms lead us to a right remedy without much effort. I would suggest young homeopaths to try this method for a successful clinical practice.


“Prescribe for the PATIENT- not the DISEASE”. It is a statement well known to all homeopaths.

This statement actually means, homeopathic prescriptions should be PATIENT-SPECIFIC. Not DISEASE-SPECIFIC.

You cannot make a HOMEOPATHIC prescription for a DISEASE by its name, without taking into consideration the INDIVIDUAL patient as a WHOLE.

You cannot prescribe for HYPERTENSION, DIABETES, RHEUMATISM or ANY disease, without studying the peculiarities of INDIVIDUAL patient suffering from hypertension, diabetes or rheumatism.

Making PATIENT-SPECIFIC prescriptions does not mean ignoring DISEASE and prescribing only on the basis of individual CONSTITUTION, as some homeopaths argue. I don’t agree with the view that constitutional prescriptions will cure all diseases of an individual, whatever the disease be.

According to my view, we have to consider the totality of DISEASE-SPECIFIC and PATIENT SPECIFIC symptoms in a particular case, and make a prescription FOR THE PATIENT.


MOLECULAR ERRORS in a living organism that constitute a state of DISEASE can be rectified using MOLECULAR IMPRINTS of drug substances that in MOLECULAR FORMS can produce SIMILAR molecular errors in healthy organism.

This is the SIMPLE, SCIENTIFIC explanation of HOMEOPATHY.



According to me, it means, if you are using drugs that match to your patients by similarity of ‘molecular errors’ as indicated by ‘similarity of symptoms’, and if you are using drugs in ‘molecular imprints forms’ or ‘potentized forms’, IT IS HOMEOPATHY.


Homeopaths should learn to perceive:

LIFE in terms of interactions of complex biological molecules,

DISEASE in terms of molecular errors in biochemical processes,

SYMPTOMS as expressions of underlying pathological
molecular errors,

DRUGS in terms of constituent molecules,

CURE in terms of removal of bio-molecular


POTENTIZED DRUGS in terms of constituent
molecular imprints.

Then only they can understand the scientific explanation of homeopathy as MOLECULAR IMPRINTS THERAPEUTICS.


Since individual molecular imprints contained in potentized drugs cannot interact each other, and they act upon the pathogenic molecules in their individual capacities, there is nothing wrong in combining two or more drugs in potencies 12C or above, if warranted according to indications.

I have been experimenting this by preparing DISEASE-SPECIFIC combinations of general STOCK MEDICINES. While dispensing, I use to make them PATIENT-SPECIFIC by adding more drugs into the stock medicines as per requirements, which are selected on the basis of PHYSICAL GENERALS and MENTALS of the particular patient.

For example, I have compounded separate STOCK MEDCINES for ASTHMA, HAEMORRHOIDS, GASTRIC ULCER, DYSMENORRHOEA and other clinical conditions. When a patient with asthma comes, I use to work out his case minutely and find the CONSTITUTIONAL remedies indicated for him. These constitutionally indicated drugs are added to the ASTHMA stock medicine, and administered to the patient. This method helps me to prescribe very effortlessly, and gives marvelous results.



We can effectively prevent the birth of autistic children by regular administration of homeopathic drugs selected on the basis of physical generals and mentals to mothers right from the early months of pregnancy. Molecular imprints contained in appropriately selected homeopathic drugs can deactivate the exogenous and endogenous pathogenic molecules that act as epigenetic factors affecting the genetic expression processes associated with the develoment of neurons and synapses in infants, thereby preventing autism. This knowledge should be widely propagated and practiced as part of routine homeopathic pregnancy management protocol by homeopathic physicians.


Symptoms of AUTISM vary widely in individuals. Impairment in social interaction and verbal and non-verbal communication, and by restricted, repetitive or stereotyped behavior are the CHARECTERISTICS of autism, which reflect a disorder of neural development.

Autism is considered to affect information processing in the brain by altering how nerve cells and their synapses connect and organize, but the exact causes and biological mechanism of this process is not so far well understood.

Even though autism has a strong genetic basis, it is not an INHERITED GENETIC DISEASE. It is not associated with any inherited chromosome abnormality. Rather, it is the ‘mutational’ outcome of EPIGENETIC factors influencing the neuron development during the early stages of fetal development and post natal period. Many factors known to be taratogens that cause BIRTH DEFECTS are also associated with development of autism.

Environmental causes, drugs, heavy metals, pesticides maternal and childhood vaccines, maternal and pre-natal infections, emotional shocks in mothers, alcoholism, illicit drugs, smoking – there are a lot of factors belonging to EPIGENETIC SPECTRUM of causes that lead to autism in a child. Certain foods, solvents, diesel exhaust, phthalates and phenols used in plastic products, pesticides, insect repellents, brominated flame retardants are also supposed to be implicated. ANTIBODIES formed in maternal body against diverse types of infections and alien proteins also have to be included in this list, which from a homeopathic angle indicates strong MIASMATIC basis for autism.

Symptoms belong to Following characteristics:

Stereotypy is repetitive movement, such as hand flapping, head rolling, or body rocking.

Compulsive behavior is intended and appears to follow rules, such as arranging objects in stacks or lines.

Sameness is resistance to change; for example, insisting that the furniture not be moved or refusing to be interrupted.

Ritualistic behavior involves an unvarying pattern of daily activities, such as an unchanging menu or a dressing ritual. This is closely associated with sameness and an independent validation has suggested combining the two factors.

Restricted behavior is limited in focus, interest, or activity, such as preoccupation with a single television program, toy, or game.

Self-injury includes movements that injure or can injure the person, such as eye poking, skin picking hand biting, and head banging.

Homeopathic prescriptions should be based on TOTALITY OF SYMPTOMS, combined with a CAUSATIVE and MIASMATIC approach.

Symptoms in autistic child varies widely, and should be carefully recorded by directed OBSERVATIONS by the physician, and talking to CARE GIVERS.

Symptoms noted during earlier stages of disease development should be carefully collected.

Peculiar GESTURES are most important in deciding the prescription. Emotional symptoms, symptoms associated with sleep patterns, eating habits, thermal responses etc also are important.

You can never deal with autism by SINGLE DRUG approach. Multiple drugs will be required, depending up on symptoms, miasms and causative factors. Do not hesitate to use any number of drugs, and repeat doses frequently for long periods.

Since AUTISM is not associated with chromosome abnormalities, it is CURABLE with homeopathy. It is an EPIGENETIC disease. Only problem is, the disease should be diagnosed and treatment started at very early stage of development. Earlier we start, better the chances of complete cure.


Diseases, Drugs, Symptoms, Potentization,
Similimum, Cure- A Scientific Perspective Of

Diseases, other than those originating from genuine
nutritional deficiencies and genetic abnormalities, are
caused by diverse types of exogenous or endogenous
pathological molecules, which inhibit the normal actions
of essential biological molecules by binding to them.
Exactly, it is the ‘functional groups’ of pathological
molecules that bind to biological molecules and produce
pathological inhibitions, which are expressed through
subjective and objective symptoms we call as ‘diseases’.

Constituent chemical molecules of a drug substance
interact with our body by binding their diverse types of
‘functional groups’ or ‘moieties’ with specific biological
target molecules in our organism and modifying their
actions. This interaction is determined by configurational
as well as charge affinities between those functional
groups and biological target molecules. It is the number
of types of biologically active ‘functional groups’ or
‘moieties’ available in a drug substance that decides
whether it is a ‘single’ drug or ‘multiple’ drug.

Different types of ‘functional groups’ of individual
molecules contained in a drug substance bind to different
biological target molecules, and produce different types
of modifications. It is this ‘modifying’ or ‘inhibitory’
actions that produce molecular states of pathologies
during drug proving, which are expressed through diverse
types of subjective and objective symptoms.

Similar functional groups being part of different drug
molecules of even different drug substances can bind to
same target molecules and produce similar bio-molecular
modifications and similar symptoms.

When a drug molecule has functional groups or
moieties similar to those of a pathological molecule, they
can attack same biological targets, and symptoms they
produce would be similar. In such a situation, the drug
molecule is said to be ‘similimum’ to that pathological
molecule. Obviously, according to scientific perspective,
we should understand the concept of ‘similimum’ in terms
of similarity of ‘functional groups’ or ‘moieties’ of
pathological molecules and drug molecules.

Potentization is exactly a process of controlled ‘host-
guest’ interactions, by which the three-dimensional
configuration of ‘functional groups’ of individual
constituent molecules of drug substances (host) are
imprinted into a hydrogen-bonded supra-molecular matrix
of water-ethyl alcohol molecules (guest) as ‘nanocavities’.

These nanocavities or ‘molecular imprints’ can bind to
and deactivate any functional group having configuration
similar to that of original ‘host’ molecule imprinted into it.
As such, a molecular imprints can act as artificial binding sites
pathological molecules, if the drug and
disease were capable of producing ‘similar’ symptoms,
which actually mean, they contain similar ‘functional

I hope, scientific meaning of ‘similia similibus curentur’
is well explained here, and scientifically viable answers
provided for the THREE fundamental questions of
homeopathy- what happens during potentization, what are
the active principles of potentized drugs, and what is the
exact molecular mechanism by which potentized drugs
produce a therapeutic effect. Answers to all other
secondary questions could be easily evolved once you
comprehend these fundamental answers.


I believe it is cruel to give ‘placebo’ to a patient , making him believe that he is taking medicines as part of treatment for his disease. There is an element of cheating also in it!


One of the difficult problem facing me when designing a protocol for an EXPERIMENT to ‘verify’ whether homeopathy works or not is regarding CONTROLS. Scientific method demands there should be a reasonable percentage of CONTROLS kept on PLACEBO only, for the experiment to be authentic and acceptable to the scientific community.

When I am conducting an EXPERIMENT to prove homeopathy can cure cancer, I have to give INDICATED drugs to a group of patients diagnosed to be having cancer, stopping all other medications and treatments. Along with that I should keep a group of diagnosed cancer patients as controls giving them only placebo, and stopping all other medications and treatments.

It is obvious that such an experiment will take a reasonably long course to lead to an evaluation process. Is it ethical and lawful to keep diagnosed cancer patients without any treatment for such a long period of time, leaving them defenseless preys to the ravages of malignancy even if it be with their consent? This question bothers me a lot. Comments, please….


Classical concepts of ‘miasms’ and method of
‘miasmatic analysis’ for selecting ‘anti-miasmatic’ drugs
will undergo drastic change when we accept the
definition of homeopathy as ‘Molecular Imprints

According to new approach, hahnemann’s
concept of miasms is redefined as chronic disease
dispositions due to the residual ‘off-target’ molecular inhibitions
caused by antibodies formed against ‘alien’ proteins
including infectious agents entering the organism. Most of
these antibodies exist life-long inside the organism,
causing diverse types of chronic diseases which include
so-called auto-immune diseases also. To combat these
chronic effects of anti-bodies, specific nosodes and other
‘anti-miasmatic’ remedies containing ‘molecular imprints’
that could de-activate these antibodies will have to be
used. Anti-miasmatic ‘molecular imprints’ will have to be
selected on the basis of infectious diseases, vaccinations
and anaphylactic histories. Properly selected specific
anti-miasmatic drugs will have to be used along with
symptomatically selected drugs, especially in ‘total cure’

Theoretically, ‘totality of symptoms’ include symptoms of
‘miasms’ also. I think ‘symptoms’ need not be the ‘only’
factor to considered if we have an exact understanding of
‘molecular level pathology’. Symptoms are only ‘one of
the tools’ for identifying pathological molecular errors and
selecting remedial agents’. When we know the ‘causative’
factors, we can prescribe even without symptomatic indications to a specific remedy

Locating the ‘molecular errors’ and identifying the appropriate molecular imprints to remove that errors is the primary concern,
whatever be the tools we utilize for that purpose.

Materia medica of nosodes are much imperfect, and
repertories do not represent them with due importance. Due
to this limitation, we never get nosodes as similimum
through symptomatic repertorization.

Not only past ‘illness’, we should also consider history of
vaccinations and ‘allergies’, when we define miasms as
antibodies against ‘alien proteins’.

So called dispositions for ‘allergies’ have to be considered from
miasmatic point of view. Allergic sensitizations happen
due to the interaction of immune system with ‘allergens’
which are in most cases alien proteins. Potentized
allergens would contain molecular imprints of these alien
proteins, and hence should be considered as nosodes.
Allergy is actually the reaction of organism towards an
‘alien’ protein entering the organism. Antibodies are
formed as a mechanism for trapping, marking and
destructing these alien proteins, which are harmful to the
system as they are proteins that do not match to the
‘genetic blueprint’ of the organism. As such, we can say,
allergy is the reaction of organism towards proteins that
do not match to its own genetic blueprint. That is why
they become ‘aliens’. Even ‘egg albumin’, ‘saliva’ or
‘serum’ of an animal belonging to another species
become deadly poisons due to the mismatch of genetic
blueprint and protein molecules.

You can see, the MIT approach makes the concept of
‘miasms’ much broader than classical approach. Instead
of three miasms originating from three major infectious
diseases that was widely prevalent during hahnemann’s
time, now we can see all ‘chronic disease’ dispositions
originating from antibodies formed against diverse types
of ‘alien’ proteins. This approach help us to perceive so-
called ‘auto-immune’ diseases from a new angle. It is
known that many ‘auto-immune’ diseases such as
psoriasis, vitiligo and chrohn’s disease actually begins
after some infections or allergic sensitizations, which
shows the currently accepted ‘auto immunity’ theory will
have to be re examined. In my opinion, so-called ‘auto-
immune’ diseases are also caused by off-target molecular
inhibitions created by antibodies formed against alien
proteins. In other words, auto-immune diseases are also
‘mismatic’ in origin, and can be treated with appropriate

Obviously, re-evaluation of the concept of ‘auto-immune
diseases’ in modern medical science is a very important
implication of MIT definition of homeopathy.


Give me TWENTY children suffering from ASD for EXPERIMENTING whether homeopathy works or not. TEN of them will be treated using potentized homeopathic drugs only, selected by MY team of HOMEOPATHS on the basis of INDICATIONS. Remaining TEN will be administered PLACEBO only and kept as controls. You can evaluate the outcome after the course of treatment is over, and decide whether homeopathy works or not.


Any EXPERIMENT for verifying whether homeopathy works or not should be done only by applying INDICATED DRUGS in real PATIENTS, and observing the results. If you have TEN patients for experiment, indicated drug will be different from patient to patient. You cannot use same drug in all patients even if they have same disease, since their constitutions will be different, symptoms will be different, and indicated homeopathic drugs will be different. Experimental protocols should be decided by taking this peculiarity of homeopathy into consideration. This is entirely different from methods adopted in experiments conducted for modern medicine, where same drug is applied in all patients with same disease.


Dr Shashi Mohan Sharma, Principal, Hahnemann College of Homeopathy, United Kingdom says regarding the forthcoming scientific experiments for proving homeopathy according to the ONE MILLION DOLLAR challenge of STEVE BRIGGS, AUSTRALIA :

“I offer you all my support and wish to be an impartial judge in this experiment…With best wishes”

Thank you, and welcome sir. I hope you can play a major role in this historical event, which is going to be very crucial for the future of homeopathy as well as the whole medical sciences.


Anybody who at least once got treated with homeopathic remedies knows homeopathy is not nonsense. No doubt, IT WORKS if rightly prescribed and rightly applied.

Any ‘experiment’ conducted for ‘proving’ homeopathy, without taking into consideration the fundamental differences between ‘modern medicine’ and ‘homeopathy’ is meaningless and scientifically irrelevant.

Homeopathy differs from ALL other medical practices regarding ACTIVE PRINCIPLES of medicinal agents, as well as MOLECULAR MECHANISM of their biological actions.

Homeopathic drugs act by specific conformational affinity between molecular imprints contained in them and the pathogenic molecules present in the organism, whereas DRUGS used by other medical systems act by chemical properties of their constituent molecules. This is the fundamental difference.

Homeopathic drugs POTENTIZED above 12C (diluted Avogadro limit) do not contain any DRUG MOLECULES. Active principles of those drugs are MOLECULAR IMPRINTS of constituent molecules of drug substances. These ‘molecular imprints’ act as ‘artificial binding sites’ for pathogenic molecules having conformational affinity. Molecular imprints cannot interfere in the normal biochemical interactions between biological molecules and their natural ligands. That means, homeopathic drugs act ONLY IF there are pathogenic molecules with specific conformational affinity present in the organism. That is why homeopaths say ‘potentized drugs act only if they are indicated by similarity of symptoms’.



MIT is relevant only if HOMEOPATHY WORKS. MIT is all about answering the secondary question, “HOW it works”. Crucial thing is PROVING homeopathy works. If we cannot SCIENTIFICALLY prove homeopathy works, there is no question of MIT working! We know through thousands of ‘experiences’ that homeopathy works. Then why should we fear about failing to prove it through scientific experiments, if they are conducted fairly and properly, under the observations of an unbiased and unprejudiced jury?


I am interested only in TRUTH. I have been involved in homeopathy for the last 40+ years with a conviction and belief that HOMEOPATHY WORKS. I am very much confident that I can prove it works, since I have been seeing it working even in thousands of very difficult cases. That is why I dare to accept the challenge to PROVE homeopathy through experiments to be conducted in strictly controlled environment under the observation of impartial and unbiased observers and medical experts.

If TRUTH is proved to be otherwise, and if I fail to prove homeopathy really works, there is no meaning for me in continuing my talk about homeopathy any more. In that case, I will leave homeopathy for ever, and declare the world, my convictions have failed, and ‘homeopathy is fake’! Why should I stand by something that is not TRUE?

I am in a win or perish situation now. If I win, it will be a great win for homeopathy and the whole medical science at large. If I fail, it will ultimately damage even the future existence of homeopathy. I know the risks involved.

My friends say, I am playing with fire. May be a ‘fire escape play’. I love to play with fire. And I am sure, I will come out of this fire as a winner! You cannot win something without risking something!


I am confident, I can PROVE homeopathy through scientific experiments to any one who is unprejudiced and genuinely interested in knowing the TRUTH regarding whether homeopathy works or not.

If you are prejudiced against homeopathy, and your only interest while asking for PROOF is in ‘disproving’ homeopathy, it is sure that nothing will satisfy you except ‘disproving’. That is what happened in the case of ‘james randi- george vithoulkas’ controversy related with the famous ‘one million dollars challenge’.

While asking for experiments for ‘proving’ homeopathy, you should not forget the fundamental difference between modern medicine and homeopathy regarding the active principles of their drugs as well as the biological mechanism of their curative action. Active principles of drugs usef in modern medicine are ‘drug molecules’ which act by their chemical properties, where as active principles of potentized drugs are ‘molecular imprints’ of drug molecules, and they act by their conformational affinities towards specific pathological molecules.

It is obvious that validating the action of potentized drugs needs certain parameters, methods and protocols that are entirely different from drug validation of modern medicine.


Unless homeopathic professionals and academicians discard the ‘beyond matter’ and ‘beyond science’ theories about homeopathy they so far preached and practiced, and start thinking, talking and practicing as ‘men of science’, homeopathy will continue to remain aliented from mainstream scientific community.


But it is a fact that even those who make wonderfully successful prescriptions do not know HOW IT WORKS.

Our theoreticians- including hahnemann- were never successful even in proposing a scientifically viable working hypotheseis regarding how homeopathy works. Homeopathy was explained using unscientific concepts of ‘vital force’ and ‘dynamic drug energy’.

Even our modern theoreticians go on spinning most ridiculous nonsense theories that are totally against all existing scientific knowledge and proven objective laws of nature. They make theories about ‘limitations’ of science and raise questions about ‘scientificness’ of scientific knowledge and methods. They design new ‘principles and methods of practice’ that imitate vulgar occult practices. They market homeopathy with far exaggerated claims and unfounded testimonials, just like any street marketer promoting his fraud products.

Our theoreticians and ‘brand builders’ are actually alienating homeopathy further from scientific community. They are making homeopathy a subject of unending ridicule and mockery. They are responsible for providing sufficient materials to skeptics to attack homeopathy.




Steve Briggs: I bet you… a million dollars (!) MIT works no better than placebo.

Me: @Steve Briggs: Are you serious about this BET for ‘million dollars’? Tell me the modalities for this ‘bet’, sir

Me: My understanding of your offer is that, you will give me ‘million dollars’ if I PROVE homeopathy( MIT) ‘works’. RIGHT?

Steve Briggs: Correct!

Me: That means, we can move forward with the ‘bet’. First of all, we have to negotiate and reach a consensus regarding methods and modalities of settling the issue, decide the experiments to be done, draft a legally valid agreement, decide juries and venue. Then you have to provide a bank guarantee for million dollars. I am from kerala, India. If you are serious with your bet, please send me a draft of agreement to my email id similimum@gmail.com. After receiving your draft, I shall propose my changes, and contact you through my attorney.



A homeopath friend messaged me: “Nothing is said in organon about molecular imprinting, and as such, your theory is not acceptable to homeopathy”.

He is right. My explanation of homeopathy in terms of ‘molecular imprints’ cannot be seen in any of the aphorisms of organon.

According to my view, ORGANON is only a MEDICAL BOOK written by a great visionary 250 years ago to explain the phenomena in curative process he observed, in terms of knowledge available to him at that point of time. There are lot of things to be scientifically updated in organon, in order to make homeopathy a real medical science.

Organon perceives active principles of homeopathic drugs as ‘non-material and dynamic drug energy released through potentization’, which act upon the ‘vital force’ in a ‘dynamic way’. If you consider ORGANON as the ultimate authority in scientific knowledge of therapeutic art, you cannot agree with my scientific explanations of homeopathy which says active principles of potentized drugs are ‘molecular imprints’. You cannot even understand what I am saying.


Scientific outlook is essential to validate or judge MIT. Homeopaths who are ‘believers’ of a model based on ‘dynamic drug energy’ and ‘vital force’ , and who believe organon is the ULTIMATE word in homeopathy, cannot UNDERSTAND or ACCEPT the scientific model proposed by MIT. Most people sitting influenzial in positions of official authority belong to this class. Even if some persons among them have scientific outlook and unprejudiced approach, majority who have the final say in matters of homeopathy are miserably hopelessly prejudiced and nurturing vested interests, such as ‘hair transmission’ experts. That is why I have very limited expectations regarding the outcome of an official validation. What ever be the JUDGEMENT, I am sure MIT will be recognized and accepted by the scientific minded sections of homeopathic community. My work will go on until MIT sees the victory stand, whether any AUTHORITY recognizes it or not.


Since Dr Manchanda, Director of CCRH has set the wheels to motion to “look into this aspect as requested” regarding validation of MIT concepts, I request ALL FRIENDS on this group interested in MIT to put a word here commenting on this revolutionary concept. Such comments from members of homeopathic community will contribute much in our further advance, by way of convincing CCRH. Even a single word from every homeopath matters a lot now. This is a humble request, …………..PLEASE, FRIENDS..



Responding to my request submitted to CCRH for considering MIT concepts seriously, and to appoint a sub-committee of experts to look into its viability and implications, and recommend future course of actions and research projects on MIT, Dr. R K Manchanda, Director General, Central Council for Research in Homoeopathy has informed me that he has forwarded my request to Dr.Debadatta Nayak and Anil Khurana of CCRH, asking them to “look into this aspect as requested”.

Thank you, Dr Raj Manchanda. Whole homeopathy community will be much obliged to you for this epoch-making bold step, that is going to be part of history. Your move is going to herald a much awaited SCIENTIFIC REVOLUTION in homeopathy in coming days.


Scientific explanation of homeopathy proposed by MIT effectively resolves the paradigm divide between modern medicine and homeopathy for the first time in its 250 years of history. For the first time, homeopathy is talking about life, disease, drugs and biological mechanism of cure using the terms and concepts of modern science, exactly similar to modern medicine.

I would request homeopaths to try to explain homeopathy in terms of MIT concepts to your counter parts in modern medical practice, and see how they respond in a way totally different from earlier occasions. You can see, it is easy for you communicate with them, whether they agree with your explanations or not. Now you can see, it is not so easy for them to sweep aside homeopathy as ‘fake’, ‘unscientific’, placebo’ or ‘belief’. At least there is scope for a reasonable interaction.

MIT concepts make homeopaths confident enough to interact with members of medical fraternity and scientific community as professional equals, enabling to discuss the basic principles and modus operandi of homeopathic therapeutic art with them in a language understandable and convincing to them.


Learning new things, generating new ideas, setting new targets, making new plans and working upon them, hoping, expecting……..and waiting! For me, life goes on as usual. Once my wheels stop running, I cease to exist.


One of my respected homeopathic friends told me yesterday: “All your articles, writings and posts reflects a pathological state of mind. I have worked up on your mental symptoms as indicated by your writings, and found colocynthis as your similimum. Take a single dose of it and see the change it brings’.

This is a very nice, clever ‘homeopathic’ way of telling me that my ideas about homeopathy are ‘pathological’! Thanks! Should i reciprocate by working up on his mental symptoms and proposing a drug?

VOLUME- I: http://dialecticalohmeopathy.wordpress.com/2012/03/10/selected-facebook-updates/

VOLUME- II: http://dialecticalohmeopathy.wordpress.com/2012/08/04/volume-ii-compilation-of-my-selected-facebook-updates/

VOLUME- III: http://dialecticalhomeopathy.com/2013/05/12/volume-three/

VOLUME- IV: http://dialecticalhomeopathy.com/2013/06/04/selected-facebook-updates-volume-four/

VOLUME V: http://dialecticalhomeopathy.com/2013/10/09/volume-v-selected-facebook-updates-and-tweets-of-chandran-k-c-on-scientific-homeopathy/

VOLUME VI: http://dialecticalhomeopathy.com/2013/10/11/volume-vi-selected-facebook-updates/

VOLUME VII: http://dialecticalhomeopathy.com/2013/10/24/volume-vii-selected-facebook-updates-and-tweets-of-chandran-k-c-on-scientific-homeopathy/

VOLUME VIII: http://dialecticalhomeopathy.com/2013/12/16/volume-viii-selected-facebook-updates-and-tweets-of-chandran-k-c-on-scientific-homeopathy/


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: