|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 12:03:21 -0400, Warp wrote:
> Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospam com> wrote:
>> That was the point Randi was making - some of the dilutions that were
>> being advertised were less than one molecule per 6x10^23 atoms of water
>> - or, as he also described < one molecule of caffeine (or whatever) per
>> *more atoms of water than would fit in the space provided in the
>> packaging*. IOW, it wasn't a *diluted* solution, it was to the point
>> of placing odds on one molecule being even *in* the container, and
>> those odds weren't particularly good.
>
> Remember that the active ingredient is something that *causes* the
> symptoms, not something that *cures* them (for example in a homeopatic
> sleeping pill the active ingredient is usually caffeine). Hence taking
> this ingredient *away* from the water likewise takes the *symptoms* away
> from the person. The more of it you take away, the more effective the
> stuff is. It makes perfect sense.
It's a load of codswallop. If I titrate caffeine to the point there's
none left in solution in the water, the water is *no different* than
taking water that's never been near caffeine. It is chemically the
*same*.
And thus would have the same effect as drinking an ordinary glass of
water.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |