HomeAbout / MissionScience deconstructedPseudo-skeptics deconstructedConsciousnessNondualityDMTThe control systemDecentralization

Articles by topic

The truth about ...

Placebo effect

or: How healing (and medicine) really works

or: The canary in the coal mine of the medical industry

The infamous and magnificent placebo effect — that supposedly mysterious, intangible, irrational, yet undeniably real, "magical" yet always-observed, clearly-discernable healing effect — is the canary in the coal mine of the medical establishment (a.k.a. the sickness industry). In times past, coal miners would place a canary in a cage near the entrance to coal mines, because coal fumes are highly toxic to birds (and to humans), so if the bird has died it would mean that there are significant levels of toxic fumes and it would be time to abandon the mine for a while. Sooner or later, the placebo effect will stand out as a glaring anomaly to the Western medical paradigm to such an extent that it will function as the canary in the coalmine such that all the honest people within the medical/sickness industry will have abandoned the mine, and all that will be left is purely the toxic profit-seeking interests that characterize the evil side which makes the Western medical establishment better described as the industry of sickness and death.

Placebo will work if you believe it will

When attempting to describe the placebo effect in Western scientific fields, reductionism reigns by necessity. The inability to understand what the placebo effect is, is foundationally a result of the misunderstanding of causality as 4th-dimensional rather than higher-dimensional. The "moments" of the 4th dimension are the same one moment — the eternal now — experienced from a different point of view. In the West, the 4th-dimensional Physical Mind, or rather the ego construct within it, is operating under the objective reality delusion and furthermore under physicalism (fundamentalist-materialism), and has generally unconsciously embraced the religion of science — and thus from the perspective of that (meta)paradigm has no way to explain the placebo effect other than resorting to the vagueries of coincidence theory.

Within the objective reality metaparadigm and physicalism, the placebo effect can thus only be described in terms of placebo:

A placebo is a simulated or otherwise medically ineffectual treatment for a disease or other medical condition intended to deceive the recipient. Sometimes patients given a placebo treatment will have a perceived or actual improvement in a medical condition, a phenomenon commonly called the placebo effect. Placebo effect consists of several different effects woven together, and the methods of placebo administration may be as important as the administration itself.

In medical research, placebos are given as control treatments and depend on the use of measured suggestion. Common placebos include inert tablets, vehicle infusions, sham surgery, and other procedures based on false information. However, placebos may also have positive effect on a patient's subjective experience who knows that the given treatment is without any active drug, as compared with a control group who knowingly did not get a placebo.

Placebo effects are subject of recent scientific research aiming to understand underlying neurobiological mechanisms of action in pain relief, immunosupression, Parkinson disease and depression. Brain imaging techniques done by Emeran Mayer, Johanna Jarco and Matt Lieberman showed that placebo can have real, measurable effect on physiological changes in the brain. The objective physiological changes have been reported, from changes in heart rate and blood pressure to chemical activity in the brain, in cases involving pain, depression, anxiety, fatigue, and some symptoms of Parkinson's, but in other cases, like asthma, the effect is purely subjective, when the patient reports improvement despite no objective change in the underlying condition.

Placebos are widely used in medical research and medicine, and the placebo effect is a pervasive phenomenon; in fact, it is part of the response to any active medical intervention.

The placebo effect points to the importance of perception and the brain's role in physical health. However, the use of placebos as treatment in clinical medicine (as opposed to laboratory research) is ethically problematic as it introduces deception and dishonesty into the doctor-patient relationship.

Under the objective reality delusion, when a placebo works, the scientists aim to "understand the underlying neurobiological mechanisms of action", and when it also works, but cannot be measured, they write it off as "not real", noting "no objective change in the underlying condition". The placebo effect actually works even if people know they're taking placebos.

Dr. Joseph Mercola summarizes the standard scientific understanding of "why" or "how" the placebo works:

What Makes the Placebo Effect Work?

The jury is still out on the exact mechanisms that make the placebo effect so effective. It does appear that simply going through the ritual of treatment is enough to cause a beneficial response in many cases. Regardless of the mechanism, studies show that if you think you're receiving a treatment, and you expect that treatment to work, it often will. A previous article in Scientific American noted that:

"Placebo effects can arise not only from a conscious belief in a drug but also from subconscious associations between recovery and the experience of being treated — from the pinch of a shot to a doctor's white coat. Such subliminal conditioning can control bodily processes of which we are unaware, such as immune responses and the release of hormones."

This was demonstrated in a study published earlier this year, which found that people with back pain who believe or expect that acupuncture might be helpful actually get more pain relief from it, compared to those who do not believe it will work. According to study author Felicity Bishop, PhD:

"People who started out with very low expectations of acupuncture, who thought it probably would not help them, were more likely to report less benefit as treatment went on."

Research, has also shown that your emotions and/or expectations can significantly influence the perceived intensity of pain. Positive expectations and emotions tend to minimize pain, while negative emotions such as fear tend to exacerbate it. This is an aspect of pain that has been exploited by torturers throughout human history.

The amazing reality is that the "exact mechanisms" are not discernable from within the objective reality metaparadigm or the artificial parameters of physicalism/scientism, so "the jury is still out" in the same way that the Catholic Church insisted (for as long as it could) that "the jury is still out" on the Copernican model of celestial mechanics, because it contradicts the Biblical model.

Spontaneous remission

There is really no "underlying condition" except what the "patient" is defining exists in the present moment. When a "patient" is strongly believing in 4-dimensional causality (and related mind programs) and thus thinking about and focusing on what he/she does not want, then he/she will attract reality elements that are more representative of the idea of the disease condition. If the "patient" gets sufficienty tired of the condition, he/she might decide to rapidly 6th-dimensionally shift to a parallel reality that is less representative of the disease condition — a happening known as spontaneous remission:

Spontaneous remission, also called spontaneous healing or spontaneous regression, is an unexpected improvement or cure from a disease that appears to be progressing in its severity. These terms are commonly used for unexpected transient or final improvements in cancer. Spontaneous remissions concern cancers of the haematopoietic system (blood cancer, e.g. leukemia), while spontaneous regressions concern palpable tumors; however, both notions are often used interchangeably.

[...]

The spontaneous regression and remission from cancer was defined by Everson and Cole in their 1966 book as "the partial or complete disappearance of a malignant tumour in the absence of all treatment, or in the presence of therapy which is considered inadequate to exert significant influence on neoplastic disease."

[...]

At least for small tumors the frequency of spontaneous regression most likely was drastically underrated. In a carefully designed study on mammography it was found that 22% of all breast cancer cases underwent spontaneous regression.

[...]

Challis and Stam, even more at a loss, concluded in 1989, "In summary, we are left to conclude that, although a great number of interesting and unusual cases continue to be published annually, there is still little conclusive data that explains the occurrence of spontaneous regression."

[...]

There are several case reports of spontaneous regressions from cancer occurring after a fever brought on by infection, suggesting a possible causal connection. If this coincidence in time would be a causal connection, it should as well precipitate as prophylactic effect, i.e. feverish infections should lower the risk to develop cancer later. This could be confirmed by collecting epidemiological studies.

Factors contributing to placebo effects of symptom reliefThe physicalist take on factors affecting placebo effects, while dismissing its efficacy/usefulness.

Thus, in the subjective reality metaparadigm, "spontaneous remission" is higher-dimensional holistic healing, and the mechanism of action is the letting go of non-serving beliefs (such as "I have cancer").

On the biological cellular level, leading-edge biologist Bruce Lipton elucidates how it is perception rather than genes that determines cell behavior, thus upgrading the paradigm of biology (and by extension "evidence-based medicine") to become compatible with (or subsumable by) the subjective reality metaparadigm.

As Abraham-Hicks explains, spontaneous remissions are common because many people choose to experience the idea of a healing process to its extreme manifestation, and thus will only begin to pay attention to how they feel and how they want to feel as a "last ditch effort" once they are told that "all other things you might try in terms of action have now been tried and failed":

Abraham Hicks - How The Healing Process Occurs

So the amazing truth is that the entirety of Western medicine will become obsolete not because Western medicine will "heal itself out of existence" (as its implied goal is) but because the human mind will no longer believe that it doesn't have control over its health, homeostasis, and bodily processes.

We have been giving away our power to perceived authority figures on every level of our lives, not the least of which is placing responsibility for our own health in the hands of doctors, who have been ever-increasingly paid to rush to prescribe intrusive pharmaceutical drugs that mask the symptoms rather than heal the underlying causes of disease. Intrusive drugs taken on a daily regimen which in turn, particularly over time, generate ever more problematic "side" (sometimes more accurately "main") effects, for which another drug prescription will be issued, and so forth. It is not uncommon to hear older people (and even teenagers by the 21st century) to be taking several "medications" (intrusive pharmaceutical drugs) daily.

An advanced use of the placebo effectAn advanced use of the placebo effect.

Other examples of the placebo effect

Though spontaneous remission, and its high prevalence, could be seen as the most significant example of the extent of the "realness" of the placebo effect, there are many other examples. In fact, all defined sensory systems can cause a placebo effect. Following are a few case examples:

  • [Smell] Asthmatics who believed an odor was harmful experienced significantly more airway inflammation than those who believed it to be therapeutic.
  • [Sense] A double-blind, placebo-controlled, multi-center trial performed at some of the top U.S. hospitals found that most knee surgery for osteoarthritis results in a $3-billion hoax, because it's not actually the surgery itself that is responsible for the improvement, but rather the placebo effect.
  • [Deception-independent] "It has long been believed that the placebo effect works only because people believe they are taking a real drug. But a new study casts doubt on this assumption. Placebos may work even when they are administered without deception."
  • [Beliefs of impaired brains] Parkinson's Patients Improve from Belief in Expensive Drug Treatment
  • [Expectation of effectiveness] "A recent study found that expectation plays a very important role in how you respond to migraine treatment. The placebo effect accounted for more than 50 percent of the therapeutic value of the drug."
  • [Colored pills] Size, shape, and especially color affect perception and therefore effectiveness. For example, yellow pills make the most effective antidepressants, while white pills soothe stomach issues such as ulcers.

As Dr. Joseph Mercola summarizes:

The Power of Your Mind

Research suggests this power of belief can be a potent healing force. Some studies into the placebo effect have even concluded that many conventional treatments "work" because of the placebo effect and little else.

Interestingly, more recent investigations reveal the placebo effect is growing in potency among Americans, and it's having a dramatic impact on the development of new painkillers.

Drug companies are finding it increasingly difficult to get pain-reducing drugs through clinical trials, because as people's responses to placebos are getting stronger, it makes it more difficult to prove that the drug actually works.

[...]

Fake Surgery Works as Well as the Real Thing

Many are quick to conclude that the placebo effect is responsible for the benefits of alternative treatments and natural supplements — the implication being that the treatment doesn't really work, and any benefit is "all in your head."

Few stop to consider the fact that many of the benefits of conventional drugs and other interventions are also due to the placebo effect. And, unfortunately, drugs have the added downside of causing very real and adverse side effects.

One of the most dramatic examples of this was a now classic knee surgery study3 published in 2002. Not only does this double-blind, placebo-controlled, multi-center trial definitively prove the power of your mind in healing, it also reveals that most knee surgery for osteoarthritis is a waste of money.

The results of this study show that it's not the surgery itself that is responsible for the improvement; it's all due to the placebo effect. More precisely, it's the ability of your brain to produce healing when you believe it should be happening after receiving surgery.

As noted by the authors: "In this controlled trial involving patients with osteoarthritis of the knee, the outcomes after arthroscopic lavage or arthroscopic debridement were no better than those after a placebo procedure."

[...]

Mind Over Matter

Typically, for a placebo to work you have to believe it's a "real" drug. Why is that? Expectations, it turns out, play a crucial role in recovery from illness. There's a link between your mind and your body, and when you expect a pill (or surgery) to do something, your body yields to your expectation by producing the requisite brain chemicals. Needless to say, the stronger your belief or expectation, the more likely you are to experience the desired result.

The "patient" receiving placebo surgery believes in the tool (permission slip) he/she is using with a degree of certainty sufficient to allow him/herself to shift to a parallel reality in which the surgery was real and therefore the knee is healed. The idea that event A has to happen for event B to happen is ultimately only a belief, so a stronger belief in the reality/applicability/relevance of event B than A (easier to reach if believing that event A did happen) will shift one to that parallel reality vibration, because event A and event B are really states of being A and B, and exist independently of each other. Any causal binding between the events/states of being is belief, strong as such belief may be, unbreakable/unchangeable as it may often seem.

Placebos becoming more effective?

Is the placebo effect becoming stronger over time? Evidence suggests it has become twice as strong in 25 years (as of 2010):

Placebos Becoming More Effective? [Rob Bryanton]

Pharmacological Drugs Trial Results

Placebo effects are becoming stronger — reportedly only for Americans — because the collective consciousness believes more strongly that the drug works, because it has worked a lot previously and has received a lot of attention. Hence, the more popular the drug becomes, the stronger the placebo effect becomes in relation to that drug. So it's not that "Prozac is no more effective than placebo" or that "Prozac is less effective than placebo", it's that "Placebo has become more effective than Prozac because Prozac has become very popular".

Prozac, more correctly called fluoxetine, is an SSRI, the type of drug strongly associated with almost all of the school shootings and mass "non-terrorist" shootings, which over the long-term messes up the brain's serotonergic and tryptaminergic neurotransmission ability. Hence it's only logical that placebo would become more effective than fluoxetine, because placebo has less "side-effects".

As humanity becomes more interconnected, the magnitude of these effects will presumably accelerate to the point that it will become impossible to avoid noticing. Is it possible that placebo effectiveness is increasing non-linearly? Imagine if it were now doubling in as little as 10 years, or 5 years!

Placebos and the antidepressants scam

As researcher Mike Adams writes:

(NaturalNews) When it comes to antidepressants and many other drugs, double-blind drug trials are a complete fraud. Here's why: "Double-blind" means that one group gets a placebo while another group gets the real drug, but neither group knows what they're actually getting. This is supposed to sort out the placebo effects (which are real but discarded by scientists who don't believe in "mind-body medicine") from the "real" drug effects (which are considered legitimate because they are caused by chemicals) and provide proof that the drug in question works better than placebo.

There's only one problem with all that: The patients realize they have the "real" drug when they start experiencing horrific side effects!

Once patients start to suffer from side effects, they get excited about realizing they have the "real" treatment and not the placebo. From this realization, their mind creates a powerful new placebo effect from the deeply implanted belief that only chemical drugs can "balance brain chemistry" -- a claim driven into their heads by incessant drug advertising on television as well as by miracle promises from their drug-dealing doctor.

Thus, the more toxic the side effects, the more the patient generates her own placebo response that makes the drug look better than mere placebo.

Those patients who suffer no side effects, meanwhile, decide they're not on the "real" drug, and they mentally shut down any possibility of the drug actually working. This is a "negative placebo" effect.

It sounds bizarre, but it's the truth: Patients in America now believe that drugs don't work unless they generate toxic side effects. This belief system drives their mind-body reactions in drug trials, causing a gross distortion of drug trial data in so-called "double-blind" clinical trials, making it appear as if the more toxic drugs work better than they actually do.

Mike Adams

Convincing "patients" to get excited over experiencing "side"/unwanted effects of a drug would seem representative of fairly large-scale brainwashing campaign by Big Pharma and the medical industry (with U.S. government FDA-approved direct-to-consumer marketing).

Placebo effect in animals

As the article 10 Crazy Facts About the Placebo Effect by David Decher explains:

Fact: Placebo Also Occurs Amongst dogs (and other animals)

Pharmaceutical companies employ the same double blind procedures on Dogs when testing K9 medication as they do for human medications. They use two groups—in this particular study all dogs with epilepsy—and give one group the medication and the other group a placebo. It turns out the Placebo phenomenon transcends the human/dog continuum because the placebo group reacted extremely positively to the drugs.

New studies observing siberian hamsters reveal that most animals have something similar to the placebo effect that kicks into gear depending on surroundings and available body energy. When the hamsters are made to believe it is winter time, their immune system goes into a more dormant state to preserve energy. This mechanism helps to explain why we can’t simply will our way toward recovery, but need to take a pill. In essence, we need some sort of external influence to initiate the sequence of events that lead to the placebo effect.

More accurately, we believe we need "some sort of external influence to initiate the sequence of events that lead to the placebo effect" (i.e. lead to self-healing).

Animals are so flexible in regards to playing with the agendas of the minds of humans that they might well take on the healing vibration offered by researchers in double-blind studies who don't know whether they're feeding the animal the real drug or the placebo. What the animals perceive being offered, however, is the idea that by having them ingest that object (e.g. a pill) they will likely be healed, and that vibration by itself that is being offered might be enough for the animal to take on a healed vibrational state.

Beyond placebo effect

Extreme placebo effects, such as spontaneous remission, have their counterparts of equally extreme polarity on the dark side:

Nocebo effect

The idea of nocebo and the nocebo effect, or nocebo response, is the inverse energetic response:

In medicine, a nocebo (Latin for "I shall harm") is an inert substance that creates harmful effects in a patient. The nocebo effect is the adverse reaction experienced by a patient who receives a nocebo. Conversely, a placebo is an inert substance that creates either a beneficial response or no response in a patient. The phenomenon by which a placebo creates a beneficial response is called the placebo effect. In contrast to the placebo effect, the nocebo effect is relatively obscure.

Both nocebo and placebo effects are psychogenic. Rather than being caused by a biologically active component of the placebo, these reactions result from a patient's expectations and perceptions of how the substance will affect him or her. Though they originate from psychological sources, nocebo effects can be either psychological or physiological.

[...]

In the narrowest sense, a nocebo response occurs when a drug-trial subject's symptoms are worsened by the administration of an inert, sham, or dummy (simulator) treatment, called a placebo.

According to current pharmacological knowledge and the current understanding of cause and effect, a placebo contains no chemical (or any other agent) that could possibly cause any of the observed worsening in the subject's symptoms. Thus, any change for the worse must be due to some subjective factor.

Adverse expectations can also cause analgesic effects of anesthetic medications to be abolished.

The worsening of the subject's symptoms or reduction of beneficial effects is a direct consequence of their exposure to the placebo, but those symptoms have not been chemically generated by the placebo. Because this generation of symptoms entails a complex of "subject-internal" activities, in the strictest sense, we can never speak in terms of simulator-centered "nocebo effects," but only in terms of subject-centered "nocebo responses."

Although some observers attribute nocebo responses (or placebo responses) to a subject's gullibility, there is no evidence that an individual who manifests a nocebo/placebo response to one treatment will manifest a nocebo/placebo response to any other treatment; i.e., there is no fixed nocebo/placebo-responding trait or propensity.

[...]

It has been shown that, due to the nocebo effect, warning patients about side effects of drugs can contribute to the causation of such effects, whether the drug is real or not. This effect has been observed in clinical trials: according to a 2013 review, the dropout rate among placebo-treated patients in a meta-analysis of 41 clinical trials of Parkinson's disease treatments was 8.8%. A 2014 review found that nearly 1 out of 20 patients receiving a placebo in clinical trials for depression dropped out due to adverse events, which were believed to have been caused by the nocebo effect.

So a "patient" with a negative mindset who believes he is ingesting a pill that will not have a positive effect on him, or believes he has ingested a poison or toxin when in fact it is biochemically inert (i.e. a placebo), might experience the opposite of a healing effect — because causality is higher-dimensional and "what he put out is what he got back" (4th Law of Creation, a.k.a. Law of Attraction). The tool or object or ritual does nothing by itself, without the belief system of the "patient", who always has the power to override the consensus reality beliefs of the collective consciousness, even if the collective belief is strong that a particular drug produces particular effects, or that a placebo should produce no effects.

Beyond nocebo

Not only is the nocebo effect as real as the placebo effect — there are whole categorized illnesses deriving from it:

Mass psychogenic illness (MPI), also called mass sociogenic illness or just sociogenic illness, is "the rapid spread of illness signs and symptoms affecting members of a cohesive group, originating from a nervous system disturbance involving excitation, loss or alteration of function, whereby physical complaints that are exhibited unconsciously have no corresponding organic aetiology." MPI is distinct from other collective delusions, also included under the blanket terms of mass hysteria, in that MPI causes symptoms of disease, though there is no organic cause.

There is a clear preponderance of female victims. The DSM-IV-TR does not have specific diagnosis for this condition but the text describing conversion disorder states that "In 'epidemic hysteria', shared symptoms develop in a circumscribed group of people following 'exposure' to a common precipitant." [...] Also, the illness may recur after the initial outbreak.

Why would there be "a clear preponderance of female victims"? Likely because women generally express more of the wholistic-acausal right brain consciousness (divine feminine) and less of the linear-causal left brain consciousness (divine masculine).

Another one is "medical students' disease", about which Wikipedia says this:

Medical students' disease, also known as hypochondriasis of medical students, medical student syndrome, medical student disorder, medical school syndrome, third year syndrome, second year syndrome, or intern's syndrome, is a condition frequently reported in medical students, who perceive themselves to be experiencing the symptoms of the disease(s) they are studying.

The condition is associated with the fear of contracting the disease in question. Some authors suggested that the condition must be referred to as nosophobia rather than "hypochondriasis", because the quoted studies show a very low percentage of hypochondriacal character of the condition, and hence the term "hypochondriasis" would have ominous therapeutic and prognostic indications. The reference suggests that the condition is associated with immediate preoccupation with the symptoms in question, leading the student to become unduly aware of various casual psychological and physiological dysfunctions; cases show little correlation with the severity of psychopathology, but rather with accidental factors related to learning and experience.

Baars (2001) writes:

Suggestible states are very commonplace. Medical students who study frightening diseases for the first time routinely develop vivid delusions of having the "disease of the week"—whatever they are currently studying. This temporary kind of hypochondria is so common that it has acquired a name, "medical student syndrome."

One might think the observed prevalence of this "medical student syndrome" is very low, but it's as high as 79%!

No matter how much medical science would love to get rid of the placebo/nocebo effect, it is ubiquitous and cannot be ignored. It can only be (attempted to be) marginalized and demoted in meaning.

Another related term is cyberchondria:

Cyberchondria is the unfounded escalation of concerns about common symptomology based on review of search results and literature online. Articles in popular media position cyberchondria anywhere from temporary neurotic excess to adjunct hypochondria. Cyberchondria is a growing concern among many healthcare practitioners as patients can now research any and all symptoms of a rare disease, illness or condition, and manifest a state of medical anxiety.

But likely only those who have taken on the belief(s) that any major disease could befall anyone, because it's largely random and humans have little to no ability to take care of their own health.

The double-blind standard methodology

A related idea is the subject-expectancy effect:

The subject-expectancy effect, is a form of reactivity that occurs in scientific experiments or medical treatments when a research subject or patient expects a given result and therefore unconsciously affects the outcome, or reports the expected result. Because this effect can significantly bias the results of experiments (especially on human subjects), double-blind methodology is used to eliminate the effect.

Like the observer-expectancy effect, it is often a cause of "odd" results in many experiments. The subject-expectancy effect is most commonly found in medicine, where it can result in the subject experiencing the placebo effect or nocebo effect, depending on how the influence pans out.

An example of a scenario involving these various effects is as follows: A woman goes to her doctor with an issue. The doctor diagnoses with certainty, and then clearly explains the diagnosis and the expected route towards recovery. If he does this convincingly, calming her, removing fear and instilling hope, she will likely, through the positive expectancy, experience the placebo effect, aiding in her recovery. On the other hand, if her doctor had had little time for her, was uncertain about the diagnosis, and had given her a prescription, combined with a message along the lines of, "this may help sometimes," and added a message about possible horrible side effects (combined, say, with the patient having talked to a neighbor who also speaks along the same lines about the horrible side effects), then the chance of negative subject-expectancy, or nocebo, becomes quite large.

The subject expectancy effect is also clearly seen in psychotherapy.

But, as Mike Adams explained above, even the double-blind methodology has severe flaws in its design, because patients/volunteers have often been conditioned to associate "side" effects with desired effects, i.e. that the drug is working. To wit:

Once patients start to suffer from side effects, they get excited about realizing they have the "real" treatment and not the placebo. From this realization, their mind creates a powerful new placebo effect from the deeply implanted belief that only chemical drugs can "balance brain chemistry" -- a claim driven into their heads by incessant drug advertising on television as well as by miracle promises from their drug-dealing doctor.
[...]
It sounds bizarre, but it's the truth: Patients in America now believe that drugs don't work unless they generate toxic side effects. This belief system drives their mind-body reactions in drug trials, causing a gross distortion of drug trial data in so-called "double-blind" clinical trials, making it appear as if the more toxic drugs work better than they actually do.

Mike Adams

By taking advantage of this knowledge, pharmaceutical companies can design (and most likely have been designing) double-blind studies and clinical trials in ways that benefit their profit margins at the expense of truth and public health.

Homeopathy

Homeopathy is another example of a healing modality that, based on overwhelming anecdotal/experiential evidence, clearly works, but makes no sense from a physicalist perspective, and thus is irrationally dismissed as purely placebo effect (and thus in a sense somehow "not real"):

Homeopathy is a system of alternative medicine created in 1796 by Samuel Hahnemann based on his doctrine of like cures like, whereby a substance that causes the symptoms of a disease in healthy people will cure similar symptoms in sick people. Homeopathy is considered a pseudoscience. Homeopathy is not effective for any condition, and no remedy has been proven to be more effective than placebo.

Hahnemann believed the underlying causes of disease were phenomena that he termed miasms, and that homeopathic remedies addressed these. The remedies are prepared by repeatedly diluting a chosen substance in alcohol or distilled water, followed by forceful striking on an elastic body. Dilution usually continues well past the point where no molecules of the original substance remain. Homeopaths select remedies by consulting reference books known as repertories, and by considering the totality of the patient's symptoms, personal traits, physical and psychological state, and life history.

Homeopathy lacks biological plausibility, and the axioms of homeopathy are contradicted by scientific facts. The postulated mechanisms of action of homeopathic remedies are both scientifically implausible and not physically possible. Although some clinical trials produce positive results, systematic reviews reveal that this is because of chance, flawed research methods, and reporting bias. Continued homeopathic practice, despite the evidence that it does not work, has been criticized as unethical because it increases the suffering of patients by discouraging the use of real medicine, with the World Health Organisation warning against using homeopathy to try to treat severe diseases such as HIV and malaria. The continued practice, despite a lack of evidence of efficacy, has led to homeopathy being characterized within the scientific and medical communities as nonsense, quackery, or a sham.

The British House of Commons Science and Technology Committee has stated: "In our view, the systematic reviews and meta-analyses conclusively demonstrate that homeopathic products perform no better than placebos. The Government shares our interpretation of the evidence."

Popularity of HomeopathyAnd it is well-trusted because, regardless of the scien­tis­tic inability to discover a mechanism of action, it works.

Within the objective reality metaparadigm, indeed "the postulated mechanisms of action of homeopathic remedies are both scientifically implausible and not physically possible", but the idea that like cures like is another way of expressing the basic principle of energy physics in the subjective reality metaparadigm: like vibration to like vibration.

Fourth-dimensionally speaking, homeopathy works entirely by means of the placebo effect. The dilutions represent the idea of removing/attracting the substance in the remedy and thus contain not the crystallized molecular low-frequency energy but rather the higher-frequency (5th-dimensional) vibration of the idea/concept of that effect, thus the idea itself is then in a sense merged into the vibrational state of being of the individual consuming it, provided the individual believes it will indeed induce healing.

One could unknowingly ingest a placebo in place of the homeopathic remedy and it should still be highly effective. A homeopathic remedy will work almost as well if the "patient" believes he/she has taken it but was really given a placebo. "Almost" would perhaps be "equally" in cases wherein somehow nobody (experimenters, friends, etc) knows that a placebo is what is actually being ingested.

If a physicalist accidentally ingested a homeopathic remedy (a type of placebo) and later discovered that any apparent healing "was just the placebo effect", if not sufficiently convinced that full or partial healing has in fact occured, the healing may even be "undone", because it is believed that it cannot possibly be "real", therefore the condition remains unhealed because there is no other possibility allowable in the belief system of the physicalist.

A homeopathic remedy will not work for a dogmatic scientist, but may work very well (i.e. serve as a permission slip) for someone whose beliefs about what is possible are not as narrow.

The causality of homeopathy

A tincture sends a signal to the smart body to make the changes that the tincture has intent for.

Kryon [source]

The idea is that emotions and intentionality go into the production of homeopathic remedies, and a 4th-dimensionally-causal mechanism could thus be that they are water that carries or has associated with it some emotion or intention, perhaps located in a higher dimension.

Other plausible 4th-dimensionally-causal explanations for why homeopathy works have been proposed by less dogmatic scientists. As researcher James DeMeo writes in his article Water as a Resonant Medium for Unusual External Environmental Factors:

The whole field of homaeopathic medicine as developed by Hahnemann and still in widespread use today further leads us to view water as a special substance, one which has the ability to carry both charge and information content, even if the term "information" is still not yet scientifically understood. When water has a toxin placed into it, and is then succussed, or strongly shaken such as to impart myriad vortex motions within its volume, it develops a "reactive" physical chemistry, similar to the water-activation which resulted from Piccardi's use of the scale-buoy device. This shaken vortex-water, we may postulate, acquires properties much like a primitive "immune system". The activated water literally reacts to whatever minute irritating or toxic chemicals are put into it. The water is not "alive" per se, but either the water, or some life-energetic constituent within the water appears to react much like raw protoplasm to the presence of irritants. And that reaction cannot be diluted out. The reactive principle then persists even when the toxic component is diluted down well below Avogadro's Number, indicating that not even one molecule of it ought to be remaining.

The experiments of biologist Jacque Benveniste (Davenas et al. 1988) are notable among those who have investigated and supported the memory of water effect, as shown in cellular reactions to a water sample into which an antigen has been mixed, but then homeopathically diluted out of existence within that sample. In spite of the alarming hysterical reactions his work provoked within the editorial board at Nature, experiments such as these have proven the existence of a life-like reactive energetic chemistry in water, even when no "chemistry" per se was present. Clearly this requires something other than conventional wisdom to explain, and I do believe the introduction of Reich's findings on the orgone energy will aid in this understanding.

Here, I would argue the same life-energy functions are at work in both the human immune system and in homeopathic "activated water" preparations. And, in all likelihood, this is derived from a more common set of energetic principles pre-existing life, something which exists in water all by itself, and which can later be subsequently found in the living creatures made predominantly from water. Homeopathy produces a decidedly non-chemical reaction in the living system. It is suggestive of the very same kind of "transmission of qualities" affecting phase-changes one finds in the Piccardi activated water chemical tests, which show reactions within water solutions to sunspots and solar flares, even while the energy variations as they come to us from 93 million miles distance, are so miniscule as to have lost the capacity to affect chemical bonds or molecular rotational structures. Looking for a chemical-molecular mechanism therefore would appear fruitless. And yet, the effects are real enough. We must look outside of classical physical chemistry for the mechanism. They demand some kind of non-chemical matrix or energetic substrate by which water structuring is accomplished, something which resides within the water, or something that comes into the water in variable quantities or with qualitative differences, but which is not merely the raw water molecules, nor any simple conglomeration of them.

We may also favorably compare European homeopathy to Chinese acupuncture in this regard, that both have a good record of successful applications, even while both have central questions waiting to be answered in terms of their exact physical mechanisms. But traditional Chinese medicine also includes the concept of a bio-energy, called Chi or Qi, and I have given above several examples of clinical acupuncture experiments suggesting the orgone accumulator effect, when properly channeled into tiny conduits, can even without physical contact trigger reactions in people identical to acupuncture needles inserted at the same points. This implies not only that the orgone energy of Reich is agreeable with core aspects of the Chinese system of acupuncture, but also that they are both eliciting their biological effects via mechanisms which work at a deeper level than biochemistry.

James DeMeo

The ultimate cause of the effectiveness of homeopathy, however, seems to be rather physically acausal. Bashar says that it's "because your consciousness has taken over as the ingredient":

The process of diminishing the physical ingredient past that limit, is what allows you the time it takes for you to replace the ingredient with a representational vibration from your consciousness.

It's all about resonance. It's all about frequency. So there are going to be frequencies that allow for expansion; there are going to be frequencies that allow for contraction.

Whatever the intention is in terms of the alignment is the frequency that you're putting into it, so that those that then take that permission slip are aligning with that frequency which represents the healed state. And thus they have to then match that frequency in order to heal themselves — because a healer never heals anyone directly.

[...] You have been willing to accept within your vibration a frequency that represents the part, the variable, of your energy equation that represents the healed state. If you choose to match it, because it's within your belief system to use that permission slip to do so, then you heal yourself — you bring yourself back into a balanced state, represented by that frequency, completing the overall signature frequency that represents the healed state.

Bashar

The "limit" referred to being the moment in the process of homeopathic dilution where no particles of the original substance are left, as defined by the founder of homeopathy, Samuel Hahnemann. Homeopathy can work well for many people, as can be witnessed by the many people who swear by it, and is a very (even entirely) non-intrusive kind of medicine, ideally to be generally preferred over intrusive conventional allopathic pharmacological agents (or even physical methods like surgery or, in Hahnemann's time, bloodletting). But, of course, the (real, honest, actual) belief that it will work is much of a prerequisite.

Multiple personality disorder

Alters (alternate personas) occurs in multiple personality disorder

People who experience the idea of multiple personality disorder, recently renamed to dissociative identity disorder — a "mental disorder" or experience "characterized by the appearance of at least two distinct and relatively enduring identities or dissociated personality states that alternately show in a person's behavior, accompanied by memory impairment for important information not explained by ordinary forgetfulness" — could in a sense be seen to be living the placebo effect to the extent of experiencing themselves as more than one personality "inhabiting" the same one body.

Bashar points out also that it has been documented in our medical scientific literature that some people with multiple personality disorder may have two different eye colors, or can have cancer and not simultaneously.

You know that your medical science has already catalogued the idea that multiple personality so-called disorders, one personality may actually exhibit cancer and another personality may not. They're two different people. So if you become a person who never had cancer, of course there won't be any cancer in the body.

Bashar

In other words, if you shift to a parallel reality in which you never had the disease condition, you will experience that reality — you will have shifted timelines enough that rapid or even instantaneous healing (spontaneous remission) can occur within your consciousness.