Agrohomepathy / Homeopathy for the Farm and Garden

[c-ray]

http://www.moodie.biz/kaviraj.html

Quote:

Homoeopathy raises two main questions in the mind of the unfamiliar scientist. "Does it work?" and "How the hell can it work?" One way to find an answer to the first question is to try it on something that is unlikely to be susceptible to the placebo effect. In this instance I mean plants which are the subject of this book. (I would really like to take time to answer the second and perhaps it will go into thinking allowed later.)

So ... is this book an elaborate hoax to help sell snake-oil to the gullible? Is it yet another attempt by those with no scientific understanding to try and foist an absurd alternative therapy onto new victims? Or is this the start of an agriculture which doesn't poison the world? Is this the application of a two hundred year old science without a history of side-effects to a new arena which needs assistance? What are the implications of treating the plant and not the pest or disease organism?

This book raises many questions ... and answers many of them, but I hope that energy can also be lifted from the hypothetical and into the practical. Concretely this means that I hope people will use remedies on their land and then we will really have something to discuss. I hope that there will be the same weight of anecdote which many find sufficiently convincing in relation to treatment of humans. But I also hope that students and researchers will do the tough tests that raise anecdote towards the heady goal of 'proof'.

The web site mentioned in the book is awesome. All experiences can be be logged there to develop the discipline in the same way as homoeopathy has grown for humans and animals.

The story of this book for me ... I found a report of a permaculture convention in which this work was mentioned. Since I had not come across it in the intervening years I surfed the web and found a blog by a wounded veteran of the first Gulf War who had been greatly assisted by a homoeopath called Kaviraj in Holland - and the connection was a phone call away. Invite me to supper and I'll tell you that rest of that story one day!

The book pursues the aim of health for plants along the lines of classical Hahnemannian homoeopathy - one remedy at a time, totality of the symptoms - and all the other rocks which have underpinned homoeopathy for humans for 200 years. It is presented in the same fashion as homoeopathy is for humans, as a materia medica and a repertory. An unpublished body of work in such an urgent arena with so many stories of success - that's a book that needed a sympathetic publisher.

There is some material in the book that I dispute, or feel could be looked at in a more productive way. If I can award myself sufficient time I would like to write this all down and compare it to the other methods using potentised remedies. But I am very pleased to have worked with Kaviraj in bringing this book out for everyone's scrutiny. Get one!

[outdoordreams]

Have you read the book?

Ive used camomile tea, comfrey tea, stinging nettle tea, bachs rescue remedy, colloidial silver, tea tree oil................mother nature holds all the answers..........

[c-ray]

not yet I am going to order it asap
it is the future of agriculture, combined with map spraying

[c-ray]

Quote:

page 22

"In bare soil cultivation the fungi, bacteria, and viruses which are, in reality, soil borne and provide the the function of decomposers in a natural setting, are forced to attack living plants to guarantee their survival."

[c-ray]

Quote:

Independent, The (London), Apr 11, 2005 by Jeremy Laurance

Some call it snake oil, some believe it is the 21st century's cure- all: 250 years after the birth of Samuel Hahnemann, the system of medicine he founded, homoeopathy, is still the focus of scientific controversy.

Yet despite being mocked and ridiculed by the scientific establishment from the start, it flourishes today as one of the leading branches of complementary medicine, with millions of adherents across the world.

In England, an estimated 470,000 people use homoeopathic remedies every year. Walk into any high street chemist and in the complementary medicine section you will find arnica, nux vomica, pulsatilla and rhus tox on the shelves. The Queen, David Beckham and Geri Halliwell are among those said to swear by them.

The origins of the treatment lie in the dissatisfaction that the young Dr Hahnemann, a German physician who practised in the late 18th century, felt with the orthodox medicine of the time. Born in Meissen, Saxony, on 10 April 1755, to poor but middle-class parents, Hahnemann spent his childhood attaining 'knowledge by every possible means' and became proficient in eight languages. By his late teens he had developed an interest in medicine and qualified at Erlangen in 1779.

His distaste for the then favoured treatments " blood-letting, purging and burning and the administration of toxic substances such as arsenic and mercury " was not difficult to understand and it led him to devote his energy to his 'beloved chemistry'. He gave away his medical practice in 1790, just 11 years after qualifying, and began a new practice based on the principle that 'like cures like' which underlies homoeopathy.

One of his earliest experiments involved the drug quinine, used to treat malaria. He had read that it was effective because it was bitter and astringent, but realised that, if this were the case, all bitter and astringent substances would be effective, which they clearly were not.

By testing it on himself he discovered that it produced symptoms of fever similar to those produced by the disease itself and he speculated that this could be the real secret of its curative power.

He began to test other drugs on himself, his family and friends, such as belladonna, camphor and aconitum to study the symptoms they produced. But it was not until 1796 that he 'first communicated to the world by means of public print his new discovery in medicine'.

It was based on two principles. The first, called the law of similars, can be seen in the way that an effective treatment for a hangover is to have another drink in the morning. This was not the sort of treatment that Dr Hahnemann had in mind, but it demonstrates that it can work. Homoeopaths, however, believe it applies universally.

The second principle is that a treatment becomes more powerful the more it is diluted " even to the point where it is so dilute that the remedy cannot contain even a single molecule of the original substance. The process of repeatedly diluting and shaking a remedy is known as potentisation and it may be carried out so many times that it is equivalent to diluting a tiny speck of the original substance in all the world's oceans.

This is the central difficulty that scientists have with homoeopathy. If a homoeopathic remedy does not contain a single molecule of the original substance from which it was made, how can it exert any effect?

The question did not trouble Dr Hahnemann because molecules were still awaiting discovery at the time he was writing his Organon of Ration Healing, published in 1810 and Materia Medica Pura, setting out his ideas. His remedies gained currency because they were notably kinder and less injurious than the conventional treatments handed out by his colleagues.

In 1811 he moved with his family " he had married Joanna Kuchler in 1782 and they had 11 children " to Leipzig where he began teaching a small group of students in the university. But his growing success provoked jealousy and he was eventually forbidden by the courts from dispensing his medicines.

In 1821 he moved to Kthen and devoted himself full time to homoeopathy. People travelled hundreds of miles to consult him as his fame grew, but he was constantly attacked and persecuted by establishment colleagues. In response, he increasingly isolated himself leaving the movement leaderless and resulting in the formation of different sects.

Today there are two kinds of homoeopaths in the UK " those who trained first as doctors and those non-medically qualified homoeopaths who have studied the principles for several years. The latter far outnumber the former and there are at least 2,000 registered homoeopaths in Britain.

The NHS has since its inception backed homoeopathy. And five homoeopathic hospitals in Britain have enjoyed royal support. Peter Fisher, the clinical director of the Royal London Homoeopathic hospital signs himself Physician to the Queen. At one of the earliest debates on the NHS Act 1948 the Government pledged that homoeopathy would continue to be available on the health service as long as there were 'patients wishing to receive it and doctors willing to provide it'.

[c-ray]

Quote:

Independent, The (London), Aug 19, 2004 by Steve Connor Science Editor


TO SOME it is the snake oil of the New Age. To others it is a tried-and-trusted treatment that has been good enough for the likes of Bill Clinton, the Prince of Wales, Geri Halliwell and David Beckham.

Homoeopathy is big business and getting bigger. Yet there is little if any evidence to show that it works, and absolutely nothing to justify its central claim - that highly diluted solutions containing nothing but water can affect human health.

That is until now. Researchers have just published what could be the first hard evidence in a peer-reviewed scientific journal that appears to support the central idea behind homoeopathy.

The scientists, from Britain, France, Belgium, Italy and the Netherlands, have chosen the relatively obscure but respected Inflammation Research to publish what some call the "holy grail" of homoeopathy.

In summary, the study found that extremely dilute solutions can have a biological effect. Like homoeopathic remedies, the solutions in the experiments were so diluted that there was no realistic chance of a single molecule of the substance remaining in the liquid.

Scientists have likened this to believing in magic. How could something that was once dissolved in a solution, and can no longer be present in that solution, still have an effect? The scientists themselves are baffled. "We are not yet able to propose any theoretical explanation of these findings," they write. In showing that high dilutions exert a biological effect, the findings seem to break the laws of physics. Surely there must be errors in the experiment; an accusation the scientists reject. "Despite searching for artefacts, we have been unable to find any," they write.

An editorial in Inflammation Research explains why the journal published such controversial research: "The authors are unable to explain their findings but wished to encourage others to investigate this area," it says. "It is with this spirit of openness that the journal, after submitting the paper to a rigorous reviewing process, has agreed to publish the paper."

Understandably, the practitioners of homoeopathy have seized on the findings as vindication. Peter Fisher, of the Royal Homoeopathic Hospital in London and homoeopath to the Queen, said the findings were nothing short of groundbreaking. "History may come to view [the study] as a turning point in the scientific controversy surrounding homoeopathy," Dr Fisher said.

"Of course further repetition is required, but it may be that this represents the holy grail of basic research in homoeopathy," he said.

There are two central tenets of homoeopathy. The first is that an illness or malady can be treated by administering tiny amounts of a substance that might under normal circumstances actually result in similar symptoms - extract of onion for instance to treat hay fever.

The second belief is that the concentrations have to be really minute, so minute that the dilutions involved in effect get rid of the substance in question from the liquid solvent.

Homoeopathic solutions are diluted repeatedly to produce solutions that are millions of times weaker than they were originally. Often the solutions are so weak that they are equivalent to dissolving a tiny speck of something in a volume of water several times greater than all the world's oceans.

Scientifically, this would mean that the chance of just a single molecule of the homoeopathic remedy being left in the solution is next to nil. Sceptics say patients might just as well treat themselves with distilled water - which is cheaper.

Science cannot explain how such highly dilute solutions could have an effect, that is until the French biologist Jacques Benveniste came along. Working at his laboratory in Paris, Dr Benveniste formulated the idea that water retains a "memory" of what has been dissolved in it and that it is this memory that results in the homoeopathic effect. In 1988 Dr Benveniste published a study in the journal Nature in support of his water- memory theory. He claimed his experiments showed that an ultra-dilute solution exerted a biological effect.

However, the then editor of Nature, Sir John Maddox, had insisted that he would only agree to publication if he was able to investigate Dr Benveniste's laboratory procedures. A few weeks later Sir John invited an American science fraud investigator, Walter Stewart, and a professional magician and arch sceptic, James Randi, to watch over Dr Benveniste as he and his team tried to repeat the experiments.

The Nature investigation concluded that Dr Benveniste had failed to replicate his original study. In subsequent issues of Nature, Dr Benveniste suffered the professional ignominy of being ridiculed by arguably the most influential scientific journal in the world.

As a result, the idea of memory water was consigned to the dustbin of science history, or so it was thought.

France as a country is a keen advocate of homoeopathy and there were many French scientists who had not given up on the notion of investigating the phenomenon. Among them was a one-time collaborator of Dr Benveniste called Philippe Belon, who now works for a French homoeopathy company, Boiron.

[c-ray]

from http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon...thytrans.shtml

Quote:

Homeopathy: The Test - transcript

NARRATOR (NEIL PEARSON): This week Horizon is doing something completely different. For the first time we are conducting our own experiment. We are testing a form of medicine which could transform the world. Should the results be positive this man will have to give us $1m.

JAMES RANDI (Paranormal Investigator): Do the test, prove that it works and win a million dollars.

NARRATOR: But if the results are negative then millions of people, including some of the most famous and influential in the world, may have been wasting their money. The events that would lead to Horizon's million dollar challenge began with Professor Madeleine Ennis, a scientist who may have found the impossible.

PROF. MADELEINE ENNIS (Queen's University, Belfast): I was incredibly surprised and really had great feelings of disbelief.

NARRATOR: Her work concerns a type of medicine which defies the laws of science.

WALTER STEWART (Research Chemist): If Madeleine Ennis turns out to be right it means that science has missed a huge chunk of something.

NARRATOR: She has reawakened one of the most bitter controversies of recent years.

PROF. BOB PARK (University of Maryland): Madeleine Ennis's experiments cannot be right. I mean it's, they're, they're, preposterous.

MADELEINE ENNIS: I have no explanation for what happened. However, this is science. If we knew the answers to the questions we wouldn't bother doing the experiments.

NARRATOR: It's all about something you can find on every high street in Britain: homeopathy. Homeopathy isn't some wacky, fringe belief. It's over 200 years old and is used by millions of people, including Presidents and pop stars. It's even credited with helping David Beckham get over his foot injury and the Royals have been keen users since the days of Queen Victoria, but it's also a scientific puzzle. What makes it so mysterious is its two guiding principles, formulated in the 18th century. The first principle is that to find a cure you look for a substance that actually causes the symptoms you're suffering from. It's the principle that like cures like.

DR PETER FISHER (Homeopath to The Queen): For instance in colds and hay fever something we often use is allium cepa which is onion and of course we all know the effects of chopping an onion, you know the sore streaming eyes, streaming nose, sneezing and so we would use allium cepa, onion, for a cold with similar sorts of features.

NARRATOR: This theory that like cures like led to thousands of different substances being used, some of them truly bizarre.

DR LIONEL MILGROM (Homeopath): In principle you can make a homeopathic remedy out of absolutely anything that's plant.

PETER FISHER: Deadly nightshade.

LIONEL MILGROM: Animal.

PETER FISHER: Snake venom.

LIONEL MILGROM: Mineral.

PETER FISHER: Calcium carbonate, which is of course chalk.

LIONEL MILGROM: Disease product.

PETER FISHER: Tuberculous gland of a cow.

LIONEL MILGROM: Radiation.

NARRATOR: But then homeopaths found that many of these substances were poisonous, so they started to dilute them. This led to the extraordinary second principle of homeopathy: the more you dilute a remedy the more effective it becomes, provided it's done in a special way. The method homeopaths use to this day is called serial dilution. A drop of the original substance, whether it's snake venom or sulphuric acid, is added to 99 drops of waster or alcohol. Then the mixture is violently shaken. Here it's done by machine, but traditionally homeopaths would hit the tube against a hard surface. Either way, homeopaths believe this is a vital stage. It somehow transfers the healing powers from the original substance into the water itself. The result is a mixture diluted 100 times.

LIONEL MILGROM: That will give you what's called a 1C solution, that's one part in 100. You then take that 1C solution and dissolve it in another 99 parts and now you end up with a 2C solution.

NARRATOR: At 2C the medicine is one part in 10,000, but the homeopaths keep diluting and this is where the conflict with science begins. At 6C the medicine is diluted a million million times. This is equivalent to one drop in 20 swimming pools. Another six dilutions gives you 12C. This is equivalent to one drop in the Atlantic Ocean, but even this is not enough for most homeopathic medicines. The typical dilution is 30C, a truly astronomical level of dilution.

BOB PARK: One drop in all of the oceans on Earth would be much more concentrated than that. I would have to go off the planet to make that kind of dilution.

NARRATOR: But homeopaths believe that a drop of this ultra dilute solution placed onto sugar pills can cure you. That's why homeopathy is so controversial because science says that makes no sense whatsoever.

BOB PARK: There is a limit to how much we can dilute any substance. We can only dilute it down to the point that we have one molecule left. The next dilution we probably won't even have that one molecule.

WALTER STEWART: It's possible to go back and count how many molecules are present in a homeopathic dose and the astonishing answer is absolutely none. There's less than a chance in a million, less than a chance in a billion that there's a single molecule.

NARRATOR: A molecule is the smallest piece of a substance you can have, so for something to have any effect at all conventional science says you need one molecule of it at the very least.

WALTER STEWART: Science has through many, many different experiments shown that when a drug works it's always through the way the molecule interacts with the body and, so the discovery that there's no molecules means absolutely there's no effect.

NARRATOR: That's why science and homeopathy have been at war for over 100 years. The homeopaths say that their remedies have healing powers. Science says there's nothing but water. Then one scientist claimed the homeopaths were right after all. Jacques Benveniste was one of France's science superstars. He had a string of discoveries to his name and some believed he was on his way to earning a Nobel Prize.

DR JACQUES BENVENISTE (National Institute for Medical Research): I was considered as, well in French we have a word which says Nobel is nobelisable, which means we can have a Nobel Prize because I started from scratch the whole field of research. I was the head of a very large team, had a lot of money and so I was a very successful person.

NARRATOR: Benveniste was an expert in the field of allergy, in particular he was studying a type of blood cell involved in allergic reactions - the basophil. When basophils come into contact with something you're sensitive to they become activated causing the telltale symptoms. Benveniste had developed a test that could tell if a person was allergic to something or not. He added a kind of dye that only turns inactive basophils blue, so by counting the blue cells he could work out whether there had been a reaction, but then something utterly unexpected started to happen.

JACQUES BENVENISTE: A technician told me one day I don't understand because I have diluted a substance that is activating basophils to a point where it shouldn't work and it still works.

NARRATOR: The researcher had taken the chemical and added water, just like homeopaths do. The result should have been a solution so dilute it had absolutely no effect and yet, bizarrely, there was a reaction. The basophils had been activated. Benveniste knew this shouldn't have been possible.

JACQUES BENVENISTE: I remember saying to this, to her, this is water so it cannot work.

NARRATOR: Benveniste's team was baffled. They needed to find out what was going on, so they carried out hundreds of experiments and soon realised that they'd made an extraordinary discovery. It seemed that when a chemical was diluted to homeopathic levels the result was a special kind of water. It didn't behave like ordinary water, it acted like it still contained the original substance. It was as if the water was remembering the chemical it had once contained, so Benveniste called the phenomenon the 'memory of water'. At last here was scientific evidence that homeopathy could work. Benveniste knew this was a radical suggestion, but there was a way to get his results taken seriously. He had to get them published in a scientific journal.

JACQUES BENVENISTE: A result doesn't exist until it is admitted by the scientific community. It's like, like being a good opera singer but singing in your bathroom. That's fine, but it's not Scala, Milan or the Met, Met or the Opera at Paris, what-have-you.

NARRATOR: So he sent his work to the most prestigious journal in the world, a journal which for over 100 years has reported the greatest of scientific discoveries: Nature.

SIR JOHN MADDOX (Nature Editor 1980-1995): Nature is the place that everyone working in science recognises to be a way of getting publicity of the best kind.

NARRATOR: Benveniste's research ended up with one of the most powerful figures in science, the then Editor of Nature, Sir John Maddox. Maddox knew that the memory of water made no scientific sense, but he couldn't just ignore work from such a respected scientist, so he agonised about what to do. Eventually he reached a decision.

SIR JOHN MADDOX: I said OK, we'll publish your paper if you ;et us come and inspect your lab and he agreed, to my astonishment.

NARRATOR: So in June 1988 Benveniste's research appeared in the pages of Nature. It caused a scientific sensation. Benveniste became a celebrity. His memory of water made news across the world. He seemed to have found the evidence that made homeopathy scientifically credible, but the story wasn't quite over. Benveniste had agreed to let in a team from Nature. It was a decision he would live to regret. Maddox set about assembling his team of investigators and his choices revealed his true suspicions. First, he chose Walter Stewart, a scientist and fraud-buster, but his next choice would really cause a stir: James Randi.

JACQUES BENVENISTE: I looked in my books and I said who are, who is Randi and couldn't find any scientist called Randi.

NARRATOR: That was because the amazing Randi isn't a scientist, he's a magician, but he's no ordinary conjuror. He's also an arch sceptic, a fierce opponent of all things supernatural.

JACQUES BENVENISTE: I called John Maddox and I said what, what is this? I mean I thought you were coming with, with scientists to discuss science.

NARRATOR: But Randi felt he was just the man for the job. On one occasion he had fooled even experienced scientists with his spoon bending tricks.

JAMES RANDI: Scientists don't always think rationally and in a direct fashion. They're human beings like anyone else. They can fool themselves.

NARRATOR: So Randi became the second investigator.

JAMES RANDI: Astonishing.

NARRATOR: On 4th July 1988 the investigative team arrived in Paris ready for the final showdown.

SIR JOHN MADDOX: The first thing we did was to sit round the table in Benveniste's lab. Benveniste himself struck us all as looking very much like a film star.

JAMES RANDI: I found him to be a charming, very continental gentleman. He's a great personality. He was very much in control.

JACQUES BENVENISTE: We were quite relaxed because there was no reason why things should not go right.

NARRATOR: The first step was for Benveniste and his team to perform their experiment under Randi's watchful gaze. They had to prepare two sets of tubes containing homeopathic water and ordinary water. If the homeopathic water was having a real effect different from ordinary water then homeopathy would be vindicated. (ACTUALITY EXPERIMENT CHAT) As they plotted the results it was clear the experiment had worked.

JAMES RANDI: There were huge peaks coming up out of it and that was very active results, I mean very, very positive results.

WALTER STEWART: The astonishing thing about these results is that they repeated the claim, they demonstrated the claim that a homeopathic dilution, a dilution where there were no molecules, could actually have some sort of an effect.

NARRATOR: But Maddox had seen that the experimenters knew which tubes contained the homeopathic water and which contained the ordinary water, so perhaps unconsciously, this might have influenced the results, so he asked them to repeat the experiment. This time the tubes would be relabelled with a secret code so that no-one knew which tube was which.

JAMES RANDI: We went into a sealed room and we actually taped newspapers over the windows to the room that were accessible to the hall.

WALTER STEWART: We recorded in handwriting which tube was which and we put this into an envelope and sealed it so that nobody could open it or change it.

NARRATOR: At this point the investigation took a turn for the surreal as they went to extraordinary lengths to keep the code secret.

JAMES RANDI: Walter and I got up on the stepladder and stuck it to the ceiling of the lab.

WALTER STEWART: There it was taped above us as all of this work went on.

JACQUES BENVENISTE: Sticking an envelope to the ceiling was utterly ridiculous. There is no way you can associate that with science.

NARRATOR: With the codes out of reach the final experiment could begin. By now Benveniste had lost control of events.

JACQUES BENVENISTE: It was a madhouse. Randi was doing magician tricks.

JAMES RANDI: Yes I was doing perhaps a little bit of sleight-of-hand with an object or something like that, just to lighten the atmosphere.

NARRATOR: Soon the analysis was complete. It was time to break the code to see if the experiment had worked. Benveniste and his team were brimming with optimism.

JAMES RANDI: Oh my goodness it was party-time, cracked crabs legs and magnums, literally, of champagne packed in ice.

WALTER STEWART: We were going to be treated to a wonderful dinner. The press, many members of the press were there.

JAMES RANDI: John and Walter and I were looking at one another as if to say wow, if this doesn't work it's going to be a downer.

WALTER STEWART: Finally came the actual work of decoding the result.

JAMES RANDI: There was much excitement at the table. Everyone was gathered around.

NARRATOR: Benveniste felt sure that the results would support homeopathy and that he would be vindicated.

JAMES RANDI: That didn't happen. It was just a total failure.

SIR JOHN MADDOX: We said well nothing here is there?

WALTER STEWART: And immediately the mood in the laboratory switched, people burst into tears.

JAMES RANDI: It was general gloom.

NARRATOR: The team wrote a report accusing Benveniste of doing bad science and branding the claims for the memory of water a delusion. Benveniste's scientific reputation was ruined.

JACQUES BENVENISTE: Everybody believed that I am totally wrong. It's simply dismissed. Your phone call doesn't ring anymore. Just like actresses, or actress that have no, are no more in fashion the phone suddenly is silent.

NARRATOR: For now the memory of water was forgotten. Science declared homeopathy impossible once more, but strangely that didn't cause homeopathy to disappear. Instead it grew. Since the Benveniste affair sales of homeopathic medicines have rocketed. Homeopathy has become a trendy lifestyle choice, one of the caring, all natural medicines, more popular in the 21st-century than ever before. Despite the scepticism of science millions of people use it and believe it has helped them, like Marie Smith. Fifteen years ago Marie was diagnosed with a life-threatening blood disorder.

MARIE SMITH: I was more concerned for me children. I used to look at them thinking I may, may not be here one day for yous. That was the worst part of it.

NARRATOR: She'd tried everything that conventional medicine could offer, including drugs and surgery. Nothing seemed to work. Then she tried homeopathy. She took a remedy made from common salt.

MARIE SMITH: It's like somebody putting me in a coffin and taking me back out again. That's just the way I felt and the quality of my life changed completely.

NARRATOR: Since then Marie has been healthy and she has no doubt it's homeopathy that's helped her.

MARIE SMITH: I know it saved my life and it's made my life a lot different, yeah and I'm just glad I'm enjoying these grandchildren which I never thought I would do.

NARRATOR: There are thousands of cases like Marie's and they do present science with a problem. If homeopathy is scientific nonsense then why are so many people apparently being cured by it? The answer may lie in the strange and powerful placebo effect. The placebo effect is one of the most peculiar phenomena in all science. Doctors have long known that some patients can be cured with pills that contain no active ingredient at all, just plain sugar, what they call the placebo, and they've noticed an even great puzzle: that larger placebo pills work better than small ones, coloured pills work better than white pills. The key is simply believing that the pill will help you. This releases the powers in our minds that reduce stress and that alone can improve your health.

BOB PARK: Stress hormones make you feel terribly uncomfortable. The minute you relieve the anxiety, relieve the stress hormones people do feel better, but that's a true physiological effect.

NARRATOR: Scientists believe the mere act of taking a homeopathic remedy can make people feel better and homeopathy has other ways of reducing stress.

LIONEL MILGROM: And is there any particular time of day that you will, you'll, you'll have that feeling?

PATIENT: No.

NARRATOR: A crucial part of homeopathic care is the consultation.

LIONEL MILGROM: The stress that you have at work, is that, are those around issues that make you feel quite emotional?

PATIENT: No.

LIONEL MILGROM: The main thing about a homeopathic interview is that we do spend a lot of time talking and listening to the patient. We would ask questions of how they eat, how they sleep, how much worry and tension there is in their lives, hopefully give them some advice about how to actually ease problems of stress.

PATIENT I just feel I want to have something more natural.

LIONEL MILGROM: Yeah...

NARRATOR: So most scientists believe that when homeopathy works it must be because of the placebo effect.

BOB PARK: As far as I know it's the only thing that is really guaranteed to be a perfect placebo. There is no medicine in the medicine at all.

NARRATOR: It seems like a perfect explanation, except that homeopathy appears to work when a placebo shouldn't - when the patient doesn't even know they're taking a medicine. All over the country animals are being treated with homeopathic medicines. Pregnant cows are given dilute cuttlefish ink, sheep receive homeopathic silver to treat eye infections, piglets get sulphur to fatten them up. A growing number of vets believe it's the medicine of the future, like Mark Elliot who's used homeopathy his whole career, on all sorts of animals.

MARK ELLIOT (Homeopathic Vet): Primarily it's dogs and horses, but we also treat cats, small rodents, rabbits, guinea pigs, even reptiles, but I have treated an elephant with arthritis and I've heard of colleagues recently who treated giraffes. It works on any species exactly the same as in the human field.

NARRATOR: Mark made it his mission to prove that homeopathy works. He decided to study horses with cushing's, a disease caused by cancer. He treated them all with the same homeopathic remedy. The results were impressive.

MARK ELLIOT: We achieved an overall 80% success rate which is great because that is comparable with, with modern medical drugs.

NARRATOR: To Mark this was clear proof that homeopathy can't be the placebo effect.

MARK ELLIOT: You can't explain to this animal why the treatment it's being given is going to ben, to benefit it, or how it's potentially going to benefit it and as a result, when you see a positive result in a horse or a dog that to me is the ultimate proof that homeopathy is not placebo, homeopathy works.

NARRATOR: But Mark's small trial doesn't convince the sceptics. They need far more evidence before they'll believe that homeopathic medicines are anything more than plain water.

JAMES RANDI: I've heard it said that unusual claims require unusually good proof. That's true. For example, if I tell you that at my home in Florida in the United States I have a goat in my garden. You could easily check that out. Yeah, looks like a goat, smells like a goat, so the case is essentially proven, but if I say I have a unicorn, that's a different matter. That's an unusual claim.

NARRATOR: To scientists the claim that homeopathic water can cure you is as unlikely as finding a unicorn.

JAMES RANDI: Yes, there is a unicorn. That is called homeopathy.

NARRATOR: Homeopathy needed the very highest standards of proof. In science the best evidence there can be is a rigorous trial comparing a medicine against a placebo and in recent years such trials have been done with homeopathy. David Reilly is a conventionally trained doctor who became intrigued by the claims of the homeopaths. He wanted to put homeopathy to the test and decided to look at hay fever. Both homeopathy and conventional medicine use pollen as a treatment for hay fever. What's different about homeopathy is the dilution.

DR DAVID REILLY (Glasgow Homeopathic Hospital): The single controversial element is that preparing this pollen by the homeopathic method takes it to a point that there's not a single molecule of the starting material present. I confidently assumed that these diluted medicines were placebos.

NARRATOR: David Reilly recruited 35 patients with hayfever. Half of them were given a homeopathic medicine made from pollen, half were given placebo, just sugar pills. No one knew which was which. For four weeks they filled in a diary measuring how bad their symptoms were. The question was: would there be a difference?

DAVID REILLY: To our collective shock a result came out that was very clear those on the active medication had a substantially greater reduction in symptoms than those receiving the placebo medicine. According to that data the medicine worked.

NARRATOR: But to be absolutely rigorous Reilly decided to repeat the study and he got the same result. Then he went further and tested a different type of allergy. Again the result was positive, but despite all these studies, most scientists refuse to believe his research.

DAVID REILLY: It became obvious that in certain minds 100 studies, 200 studies would not change the mental framework and so I'm sceptical that if 200 haven't changed it I don't think 400 would change it.

NARRATOR: The reason Reilly's research was dismissed was because his conclusion had no scientific explanation. Sceptics pointed to the glaring problem: there was still no evidence as to how something that was pure water could actually work.

BOB PARK: If you design a medication to take advantage of what we know about physiology we're not surprised when it works. When, when you come up with no explanation at all for how it could work and then claim is works we're not likely to take it seriously.

NARRATOR: To convince science, homeopathy had to find a mechanism, something that could explain how homeopathic water could cure you. That meant proving that water really does have a memory. Then a scientist appeared to find that proof. Madeleine Ennis has never had much time for homeopathy. As a professor of pharmacology she knows its scientifically impossible.

MADELEINE ENNIS: I'm a completely conventional scientist. I have had no experience of using non-conventional medications and have no intention really of starting to use them.

NARRATOR: But at a conference Ennis heard a French scientist present some puzzling results, results that seemed to show that water has a memory.

MADELEINE ENNIS: Many of us were incredibly sceptical about the findings. We told him that something must have gone wrong in the experiments and that we didn't believe what he had presented.

NARRATOR: He replied with a challenge.

MADELEINE ENNIS: I was asked whether, if I really believed my viewpoint, would I test the hypothesis that the data were wrong?

NARRATOR: Ennis knew that the memory of water breaks the laws the science, but she believed that a scientist should always be willing to investigate new ideas, so the sceptical Ennis ended up testing the central claim of homeopathy. She performed an experiment almost identical to Benveniste's using the same kind of blood cell. Then she added a chemical, histamine, which had been diluted down to homeopathic levels. The crucial question: would it have any effect on the cells? To find out she had to count the cells one by one to see whether they had been affected by the homeopathic water. The results were mystifying. the homeopathic water couldn't have had a single molecule of histamine, yet it still had an effect on the cells.

MADELEINE ENNIS: They certainly weren't the results that I wanted to see and they definitely weren't the results that I would have liked to have seen.

NARRATOR: Ennis wondered whether counting by hand had introduced an error, so she repeated the experiment using an automated system to count the cells, and astonishingly, the result was still positive.

MADELEINE ENNIS: I was incredibly surprised and really had great feelings of disbelief, but I know how the experiments were performed and I couldn't see an error in what we had done.

NARRATOR: These results seemed to prove that water does have a memory after all. It's exactly what the homeopaths have been hoping for.

PETER FISHER: If these results become generally accepted it will revolutionise the view of homeopathy. Homeopathy will suddenly become this idea that was perhaps born before its time.

LIONEL MILGROM: It's particularly exciting because it does seem to suggest that Benveniste was correct.

NARRATOR: At last here is evidence from a highly respected researcher that homeopathic water has a real biological effect. The claims of homeopathy might be true after all. However, the arch sceptic Randi is unimpressed.

JAMES RANDI: There is so many ways that errors are purposeful interference can take place.

NARRATOR: As part of his campaign to test bizarre claims Randi has decided to put his money where his mouth is. On his website is a public promise: to anyone who prove the scientifically impossible Randi will pay $1m.

JAMES RANDI: This is not a cheap theatrical stung. It's theatrical, yes, but it's a million dollar's worth.

NARRATOR: Proving the memory of water would certainly qualify for the million dollars. To win the prize someone would simply have to repeat Ennis's experiments under controlled conditions, yet no-one has applied.

JAMES RANDI: Where are the homeopathic labs, the biological labs around the world, who say that this is the real thing who would want to make a million dollars and aren't doing it?

NARRATOR: So Horizon decided to take up Randi's challenge. We gathered experts from some of Britain's leading scientific institutions to help us repeat Ennis's experiments. Under the most rigorous of conditions they'll see whether they can find any evidence for the memory of water. We brought James Randi over from the United States to witness the experiment and we came to the world's most august scientific institution, the Royal Society. The Vice-President of the Society, Professor John Enderby, agreed to oversee the experiment for us.

PROF. JOHN ENDERBY: ...but they'll, of course as far as the experimenters are concerned they'll have totally different numbers...

NARRATOR: And with a million dollars at stake James Randi wants to make sure there's no room for error.

JAMES RANDI: ...keeping the original samples, so I'm very happy with that provision. I'm willing to accept a positive result for homeopathy or for astrology or for anything else. I may not like it, but I have to be willing to accept it.

NARRATOR: The first stage is to prepare the homeopathic dilutions. We came to the laboratories of University College London where Professor Peter Mobbs agreed to produce them for us. He's going to make a homeopathic solution of histamine by repeatedly diluting one drop of solution into 99 drops of water.

PETER MOBBS: OK, now I'm transferring the histamine into 9.9mmls of distilled water and then we'll discard the tip.

NARRATOR: For comparison we also need control tubes, tubes that have never had histamine in them. For these Peter starts with plain water.

PETER MOBBS: In it goes.

NARRATOR: This stage dilutes the solutions down to one in 100 - that's 1C. We now have 10 tubes. Half are just water diluted with more water, the control tubes, half are histamine diluted in water. These are all shaken, the crucial homeopathic step. Now he dilutes each of the tubes again, to 2C. Then to 3C, all the way to 5C.

PETER MOBBS: The histamine's now been diluted ten thousand million times. Still a few molecules left in there, but not very many.

NARRATOR: Then we asked Professor of Electrical Engineering, Hugh Griffiths, to randomly relabel each of our 10 tubes. Now only he has the code for which tubes contain the homeopathic dilutions and which tubes contain water.

HUGH GRIFFITHS: OK, so there's the record of which is which. I'm going to encase it in aluminium foil and then seal it in this envelope here.

NARRATOR: Next the time-consuming task of taking these solutions down to true homeopathic levels. UCL scientist Rachel Pearson takes each of the tubes and dilutes them down further - to 6C. That's one drop in 20 swimming pools. To 12C - a drop in the Atlantic. Then to 15C - one drop in all the world's oceans. The tubes have now been diluted one million million million million million times. Some are taken even further down, to 18C. Every tube, whether it contains histamine or water, goes through exactly the same procedure. To guard against any possibility of fraud, Professor Enderby himself recodes every single tube. The result is 40 tubes none of which should contain any molecules of histamine at all. Conventional science says they are all identical, but if Madeleine Ennis is right her methods should tell which ones contain the real homeopathic dilutions. Now we repeat Ennis's procedure. We take a drop of water from each of the tubes and add a sample of living human cells. Then it's time for Wayne Turnbull at Guys Hospital, to analyse the cells to see whether the homeopathic water has had any effect. He'll be using the most sophisticated system available: a flow cytometer.

WAYNE TURNBULL: Loading it up, bringing it up to pressure. Essentially the technology allows us to take individual cells and push them past a focused laser beam. A single stream of cells will be pushed along through the nozzle head and come straight down through the machine. The laser lights will be focussed at each individual cell as it goes past. Reflected laser light is then being picked up by these electronic detectors here.

NARRATOR: By measuring the light reflected off each cell the computer can tell whether they've reacted or not.

WAYNE TURNBULL: This is actually a very fast machine. I can run up to 100 million cells an hour.

JAMES RANDI: Whoa.

NARRATOR: But to be absolutely rigorous we asked a second scientist, Marian Macey at the Royal London Hospital, to perform the analysis in parallel. Our two labs get to work. Using a flow cytometer they measure how many of the cells are being activated by the different test solutions. Some tubes do seem to be having more of an effect than others. The question is: are they the homeopathic ones? At last the analysis is complete. We gather all the participants here to the Royal Society to find out the results. First, everyone confirms that the experiment has been conducted in a rigorous fashion.

MARION MACEY: I applied my own numbering system to the...

RACHEL PEARSON: ...5, 5.4 millimolar solution...

WAYNE TURNBULL: ...we eventually did arrive at a protocol that we were happy with.

NARRATOR: Then there's the small matter of the million dollars.

JOHN ENDERBY: James, is the cheque in your pocket ready now?

JAMES RANDI: We don't actually carry a cheque around. It's in the form of negotiable bonds which will be immediately sep, separated from our account and given to whoever should win the prize.

NARRATOR: We asked the firm to fax us confirmation that the million dollar prize is there.

JOHN ENDERBY: OK, now look, I'm going to open this envelope.

NARRATOR: Now at last it's time to break the code. On hand to analyse the results is statistician Martin Bland.

JOHN ENDERBY: 59.

NARRATOR: We've divided the tubes into those that did and didn't seem to have an effect in our experiment.

JOHN ENDERBY: 62.

NARRATOR: Each tube is either a D for the homeopathic dilutions, or a C, for the plain water controls.

JOHN ENDERBY: 52 and 75 were Cs.

NARRATOR: Rachel Pearson identifies the tubes with a C or D. If the memory of water is real each column should either have mostly Cs or mostly Ds. This would show that the homeopathic dilutions are having a real effect, different from ordinary water. There's a hint that the letters are starting to line up.

JOHN ENDERBY: Column 1 we've got 5 Cs and a D. Column 3 we've got 4 Cs and a D, so let's press on. 148 and 9, 28 and...

NARRATOR: But as more codes are read out the true result becomes clear: the Cs and Ds are completely mixed up. The results are just what you'd expect by chance. A statistical analysis confirms it. The homeopathic water hasn't had any effect.

PROF. MARTIN BLAND (St. George's Hospital Medical School): There's absolutely no evidence at all to say that there is any difference between the solution that started off as pure water and the solution that started off with the histamine.

JOHN ENDERBY: What this has convinced me is that water does not have a memory.

NARRATOR: So Horizon hasn't won the million dollars. It's another triumph for James Randi. His reputation and his money are safe, but even he admits this may not be the final word.

JAMES RANDI: Further investigation needs to be done. This may sound a little strange coming from me, but if there is any possibility that there's a reality here I want to know about it, all of humanity wants to know about it.

NARRATOR: Homeopathy is back where it started without any credible scientific explanation. That won't stop millions of people putting their faith in it, but science is confident. Homeopathy is impossible.

[c-ray]

from http://www.lsbu.ac.uk/water/homeop.html

Quote:

What is homeopathy?
Homeopathy is a branch of alternative medicine that is based around the surmise that an individual may be treated using minute dosesd of natural materials which in larger doses would be expected to cause the same symptoms. Remedies are made by a sequence of dilutions of the starting material in purified water or aqueous ethanol with considerable agitation (called succussion). It is gaining popularity but its efficacy is disputed. The cornerstone of homeopathy that the whole clinical picture is considered on an individual basis is not in dispute. In fact, consideration of the person is clearly becoming more important as information concerning an individual's genome becomes clearer. However criticism is leveled at homeopathic 'drugs'. Belief in whether or not dilution and shaking can have any effect on the health benefits of water (for an overview of homeopathy see for example, [484a], for a review of homeopathy research see [484b] and for a recent debate concerning Homeopathy see [1363] and its video) depends on the presence of an acceptable working hypothesis for the mode of action (see also magnetic effects). Certainly, a confounding aspect of any examination of the efficacy of homeopathic treatments seems to be the highly variable nature of supposedly similar homeopathic remedies from different manufacturing sources.

Published evidence
In spite of many (most?) people knowing of success stories (and the opposite) concerning the use of homeopathy where it is practiced [120], scientists have difficulty in regarding this form of alternative medicine as any more than a placebo effect.e A controversial paper in Nature [132] containing data from several laboratories, claiming to prove the efficacy of extreme dilution (the 'memory of water' [1112])a has not been generally accepted after the results were reported as not reproducible under closely controlled and observed (by Nature's self-acknowledged biased observers), but strained, overly-demanding and unsympathetic, conditions with negative results from only one laboratory being cherry-picked from amongst otherwise positive results [133]. The original results [132] were, however, confirmed in a blinded study by the statistician Alfred Spira [346e] and also in a rather bizarre Nature paper purporting to prove the opposite [346b],b were subsequently comprehensively confirmed by a blinded multi-center trial [346a], and new results confirm similar phenomena [1585]. In spite of this apparent confirmation by several laboratories, there are still doubts over whether the experiments are truly reproducible and whether the noted effects may be due to the origin of the biological samples or human operator effects [1362]. Further support for an effect has been found using NMR [1552].

Metaanalysis of 89 placebo-controlled trials failed to prove either that homeopathy was efficacious for any single clinical condition or that its positive clinical effects could entirely be due to a placebo effect [121a], thus leaving the scientific door open both ways. A further analysis of this data, however, indicated that some of these studies may have failed to avoid bias and that studies using better methodology yielded the less positive effects [121b]. A recent analytical review has reinforced the, more negative, view concerning the clinical effectiveness of homeopathic remedies [527]. Further, a recent quality assessment of published experiments on homeopathic preparations has concluded that many were performed with inadequate controls [651]. Although a scientific trial of homeopathy conducted for the BBC and similar work reported on ABC News' 20/20 program both failed to show any homeopathic effect, the experiments they reported have been subject to serious criticism including that of careless scientific methodology. In August 2005 [840], the medical journal 'The Lancet' controversially argued for halting any further research into homeopathy concluding it has no effect other than as a placebo. This judgment was based on its simultaneous publication of a comparative study of 110 matched placebo-controlled trials of homeopathy and conventional medicine [841]. The conclusion was reached, however, in spite of the study apparently showing little evidence of differences between the two groups (homeopathy and conventional) when all the data was considered. There were differences when a tiny percentage of unmatched larger trials were cherry-picked for further analysis (that is, 102/110 of the homeopathy studies and 104/110 of the conventional studies were discarded).c The remaining 6% of the studies, however, still showed positive (if not conclusive, possibly as the number of trials left in this final grouping was so small and unmatched) evidence in favor of a homeopathic effect over placebo. Although this study has come in for considerable and rightful criticism, and there is a strong case for its retraction, as above and [1381, 1382, [1524], it is often put forward in support of the view that homeopathy works no better than as a placebo; a fact that it clearly does not deliver.

Homeopathic solutions
A thorough investigation into the structural differences previously reported between homeopathically potentized (that is, succussed and extremely diluted) and unpotentized nitric acid solutions showed that the effect was lost or changed if different glassware was used [495]. Changes in the thermoluminescence of ice produced from ultra-diluted water have been noted [500a] but can be explained by remaining trace amounts of material (due to poor mixing, impurities, absorption, nanobubbles (that is, nanocavities) [500d] or other causes) being concentrated between ice crystals [500b]; an explanation supported by later work [500c]. Changes in the NMR relaxation times [1620a, 1620c], thermochemistry [1644] and UV absorption [1620b] of water in some homeopathic preparations remain unexplained and require confirmation.

A key feature of any difference between water before and after its use in preparing homeopathic dilutions is likely to be the vigorous shaking (succussion) that must be carried out between successive dilutions, and which may produce significantly increased concentrations of silicate, sodium and bicarbonate ions [335, 1207] by dissolution of the glass tubes and increases in nanobubbles and redox molecules [1066] from the atmosphere, respectively. Recently, a paper from Nobel prize-winning Luc Montagnier has declared that quite dilute solutions (of DNA) show entirely different properties from the less diluted solutions, that the authors propose depend on interactions with the ambient electromagnetic field [1602].f How water may show a memory is explored further in the 'memory of water' page.

Does homeopathy work?
Many ridicule homeopathy out of serious consideration as a clinical practice, sometimes resorting to unscientific, unbalanced and unrefereed editorial diatribe. One of the main reasons concerning this disbelief in the efficacy of homeopathy lies in the difficulty in understanding how it might work. If an acceptable theory was available then more people would consider it more seriously. However, it is difficult at present to sustain a theory as to why a truly infinitely diluted aqueous solution, consisting of just H2O molecules, should retain any difference from any other such solution. It is even more difficult to put forward a working hypothesis as to how small quantities of such 'solutions' can act to elicit a specific response when confronted with large amounts of complex solution in a subject. A major problem in this area is that, without a testable hypothesis for the generally acknowledged potency of homeopathy, there is a growing possibility of others making fraudulent claims in related areas, as perhaps evidenced by the increasing use of the internet to advertise 'healthy' water concentrates using dubious (sometimes published but irreproducible) scientific and spiritual evidence.

Footnotes
a Note that 'memory of water' effects (if proven) not only require the solution to retain information on dilution but clearly require this information to be amplified to negate the effect of the dilution.

b This paper was bizarre as the data it produced that showed a positive effect (therefore actually supporting the 'memory of water' conclusions) were dismissed by the Authors out of hand as 'a source of error for which we cannot account' so leaving the remaining data (that is, only the data which agreed with their headline). It should be noted that the statistical report on which this paper was based states that ' One interpretation is that there are, after all, differences between the treatments...' [346c] but this statement does not survive into the final version published by Nature. The Authors have apparently refused to release their raw data [346d] for unbiased statistical analysis. Nature also recently published a paper on 'ultrafast memory loss' in water that, perhaps ingenuously, appears to misinterpret this 'memory of water' concept, as it only concerns the 'memory' of single water molecules, not clusters of water molecules [750].

c The 'cherry-picking' is clear as (although a rationale for some sort of selection is presented post hoc) the study does not appear to have used a pre-determined rationale (or pre-determined parameters) in discarding trials, completes no sensitivity analysis and ends up apparently 'dredging' the data in an unbalanced manner, to falsify conclusions [1524]. Further analysis of the data, provided post publication, shows that the conclusions would have been different for almost all alternative cut-off points [1524]; that is, they would not support the conclusions that homeopathy is no more than a placebo effect or that homeopathy trials are less good than conventional trials.

d This 'dilution' is usually so extreme that no molecules of the starting material are expected to be found in the final 'solution'. In spite of this, the efficacy (and cost) of the homeopathic remedies are often thought to be greater, the greater the dilution.

e It should also be noted that placebo effects constitute real clinical effects [121c], should be judged positively and probably account for a significant proportion of the success of prevailing established medicine [1474]. Also, there must be a range of 'placebo effects' of different potencies and having different effects in different situations. As such, they surely overlap with true clinical effects. As an example, it seems clear that antidepressant medications used for many years are not efficacious and any perceived difference from placebo is due to the reduced responsiveness to placebo in the severely depressed [1455].

f The extraordinary results given in this paper have yet to be independently confirmed.

[DOZEE]

at the library rentin homeopath book thanks C RAY

[c-ray]

materia medica and repertory here:
http://www.considera.org/hrxmatmed.html

[c-ray]

http://www.albios.it/en/pages/matdiv/matdiv.htm
some books...unfortunately they are in italian

[quote]1) Introduzione al metodo omeodinamico (Introduction to the homeodynamic method) (pag. 41);

2) Nove incontri con l'agricoltura biodinamica: corso base ( Nine encounters with biodynamics agriculture : course base) (pag. 121);

3) Manuale di coltivazione omeo-dinamica: l'applicazione del metodo nelle varie colture (Handbookl of homeodynamic farming: the application of the method in the several cultivations) (pag. 89);

4) Calendario Agricolo Astronomico: con le indicazioni degli aspetti planetari e zodiacali per le semine, lavorazioni e trattamenti(pag. 35 pi

[c-ray]

interesting applications for homeopathy

#1 from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...99a65ff5e6c8ca

Quote:

Homeopathically prepared gibberellic acid and barley seed germination

B HammanCorresponding Author Contact Information, E-mail The Corresponding Author, 1, G Koning1 and K Him Lok2
1 Department of Botany, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa
2 Department of Homoeopathy, Technikon of Natal, Durban, South Africa
Received 31 October 2002; revised 3 December 2002; accepted 20 March 2003. ; Available online 2 July 2003.

Abstract

The potentisation process by which homeopathic preparations are produced raises the concern that these medicines have placebo effects only, since they theoretically no longer contain active molecules of the diluted substance. Plant models offer a method of examining the efficacy of homeopathically prepared solutions. This study examined the effects of homeopathically prepared gibberellic acid (HGA3) on the germination performance of barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) seeds. The effect of HGA3 (4–200 cH) on seed germination rate and seedling development was compared to that of the most commonly used form of gibberellic acid (GA3), 0.5 g l−1, and control (distilled water). The extent and type of response was dependent on the vigour level of the seedlot. Treating seeds from three vigour groups in HGA3 consistently resulted in larger seedlings. High-vigour seeds treated with HGA3 4, 30 and 200 cH germinated faster, and roots of medium-vigour seedlots treated in HGA3 15 cH were longer. Biphasic effects of HGA3 were also demonstrated. As a plant model, germinating barley seeds successfully demonstrated the ability of HGA3 to produce a biological response.

#2 The results from many trials of homeopathically prepared fertilizers vs regular fertilizers
http://www.considera.org/downloads/H...griculture.pdf

[c-ray]

Homeopathic Sprays for plants are available

here -> http://www.gwagriculture.com

here -> http://www.bdmax.co.nz

and

here -> http://www.biplantol.de

[c-ray]

Effect of the homeopathic solution Sulphur on the growth and productivity of radish. (full text)

http://periodicos.uem.br/ojs/index.p...File/1758/1586

[c-ray]

from http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default...10-2002_pg6_12

Quote:

Employing homeopathy for plant protection

By Hussnain Qureshi

For the first time in the history of agricultural research, homeopathic pesticides/insecticides have been introduced as a potent tool for plant protection. A Pakistani Homoeopath Dr Iftikhar Waris (DIW) has invented a pesticide or insecticide while staying inside the sphere of Homoeopathy.

In a detailed talk with Daily Times, Dr Waris highlighted his research work and claimed that it had already been proved that proper implementation of his research findings could bring the real `Green Revolution’ in Pakistan.

DT: How is your invention different from the available pesticides or insecticides?

DIW: My invention is different from others in many ways. Some of its salient features are:

1) It has zero pollution factor

2) The efficacy of this Homoeopathic insecticide or pesticide is 99.9 percent

3) There is no precaution needed in use of these pesticides and they are environment-friendly

4) These are 60 to 70 per cent cheaper as compared to the imported or local pesticides/insecticides

5) Its use does not alter the chemistry of the soil to lethal point

6) It is not harmful for friendly birds and animals

7) The residual of the crop can be used to feed animals

DT: Can you substantiate your claims with proof?

DIW: Yes, I definitely can. The efficacy of Homoeopathic pesticides, their low price, environment-friendly nature and other characteristics have been verified in experimentation process spread over three years. However, the demand of certain quarters to measure or analyze them as per the parameters of chemical pesticides is entirely wrong.

The development of homoeopathic is an invention and throughout the world no other country has been able to match the feat. For an invention, you have to choose a new and unique parameter to judge its efficacy and mode of action. I can only say that we are using the dynamic power of plants or herbs to make a homoeopathic pesticide or insecticide.

DT: Did you treat the seed too?

DIW: Yes, a team of our researchers experimented on seed as well. The seed preparation or treatment proved excellent in controlling all the diseases of cotton crop for 60 to 90 days. We are also administering a successful insecticide for spotted bollworm, American bollworm and viral infected cotton crop.

DT: In which region of Pakistan did you test your products?

DIW: We have carried out our experiments in different areas of the country but our major emphasis has been on the cotton growing areas. Punjab Seed Corporation, Vehari Adoptive Research Institute, Agricultural University, Faisalabad, and Multan Cotton Research Institute have been our close partners and the four deputy directors heading them have cooperated a lot with me. They have lent me a helping hand to carry out all my experiments on the cotton crop in their respective centers. This year also, they have given me permission to carry out experiments in their centers and I will definitely be cashing on this opportunity.

DT: How is your product free of adverse effects, especially those which can change the chemistry of the soil?

DIW: Unlike chemical pesticides, which are liable to cause residual effects on the soil, homoeopathic pesticides are free of adverse effects. Chemical pesticides are increasing their concentration in the soil day by day and a very careful and accurate estimate says that in most cases the concentration of pesticides was more than 10 parts per million (PPM) of the reaped crop by net weight. It is an alarming situation, which is supposed to show its toxic effects after at least 15 years.

After this period of time when the users of such crops will be infected with unidentifiable diseases, it will be very difficult for doctors to treat them. Most commonly such hazardous effects are incurable. I do believe that Hepatitis (all types) is one of the gifts of the uncontrolled use of such pesticides or insecticides. A survey on Hepatitis B says that our 10 percent population is infected with this horrible disease. Out of the whole, only two percent people are found to be infected due to blood transfusion or some contact with patients whereas the remaining 98 percent have different disease histories.

DT: You have always condemned the use of chemical pesticides. What are your apprehensions regarding them?

DIW: The commonly used chemical pesticides are extremely harmful as unidentified compounds are released during their organic degrading. These compounds are released in the atmosphere and reach the ozone layer in the sky. They also rupture this layer which results in the spread of skin diseases, including the skin cancer.

Furthermore, pesticides are toxic to many forms of life in addition to the species which need to be controlled. Honeybees and useful predatory insects such as ladybugs can be killed outright when the pesticide are applied. Pesticide residues can accumulate in the food chain, causing damage to birds, fish and other forms of animal life. In many cases, these side effects are not apparent in the early stages but are shown later; for example, in the abnormal eggs laid by birds that have fed on pesticide-treated insects. Ultimately some side effects may extend to human life as well.

Using a pesticide can be compared to taking a prescription drug and its benefits must be weighed against its side effects. Pesticides alleviate symptoms but do not provide a cure. In fact, extensive use of pesticides in agriculture has led to the development of genetically resistant insects and weed species that are no longer affected by some commonly used pesticides.

DT: Have you faced any problems during your journey to success?

DIW: Yes, there were a number of problems which we had to confront over all these years of hard work. However, the most recent one is regarding the recognition and registration of these pesticides with the concerned departments. I can’t understand why the concerned departments are not ready to accept such a marvelous invention. I don’t know what they are behaving like but I know it is very difficult to make them understand that I am working for the country, for the nation and not for myself. I have spent all my earnings on carrying out these experiments and it is a reality that a multi-national company has offered me to work for it. I refused to work for any country but Pakistan.

I have an open question for all the concerned authorities. Do they want to help me in this invention or the invention will go in vain? My point is that if a homeopathic pesticide or insecticide works equally well, rather better than a chemical insecticide or pesticide, why do not they take a chance and save foreign exchange worth billions of rupees.

DT: Do you have any comparison report validating your claims?

DIW: Yes, I have more than one report to validate my claims. For review you can check our first year report in which the experiment was conducted on cotton crop at A R Farm, Rahim Yar Khan, back in 1999. We have widened our range throughout Pakistan during 2001-2002. Worth mentioning here is that we are not ourselves assessing our success rate but waiting for the reports from the Central Cotton Research Committee (CCRC) Multan, CCRC Institute Nawab Shah, Ayub Agricultural Research Center, Faislabad, and Nayab Research Institute, Faisalabad.

[c-ray]

homeopathy + biodynamics = homeodynamics
welcome to the future

[stephengor]

I read book Homeopathy for Farm and Garden by Vaikunthanath Das Kaviraj. VAIKUNTHANATH DAS KAVIRAJ began his homeopathic work with plants in Switzerland in 1986 when a friend suggested he try treating a row of apple trees that suffered from bright red rust. To everyone's surprise, the homeopathic remedy Belladonna cleared the rust and left a much better-tasting apple than the trees had produced before. This experience inspired years of subsequent research in Australia and Europe, which form the basis of this book. The book concludes with a Repertory where conditions can be matched to remedies. The author has accumulated an enormous amount of useful information here in a groundbreaking book. The Materia Medica and Repertory are easy to follow and the selection of a suitable remedy should not pose too much difficulty. This technique is certainly worth trying as it is neither expensive nor time-consuming and will not have an adverse effect on the environment.

[Green Supreme]

Thanks for the info man. Is that spam in your signature? Peace GS

[outdoordreams]

I always use Bach's Rescue Remedy, to reduce transplant shock.

[c-ray]

from http://hpathy.com/homeopathy-papers/...r-agriculture/

Quote:

Agro-Homeopathy – An Alternative for Agriculture
December 17, 2008 by Niurka Meneses Moreno
Agro Homeopathy, General Papers
Hpathy Ezine, December, 2008

Abstract/Excerpt

The use of the homeopathic method in agriculture was introduced with Agro-homeopathy, which allows one to influence biological processes of plants to either accelerate or delay growth. Moreover, it can contribute to the control of plagues and diseases, directly promoting increased production. In agriculture, homeopathic nosodes and autonosodes can assist in controlling plagues and diseases [...]


Agro-Homeopathy – An Alternative for Agriculture

The use of the homeopathic method in agriculture was introduced with Agro-homeopathy, which allows one to influence biological processes of plants to either accelerate or delay growth. Moreover, it can contribute to the control of plagues and diseases, directly promoting increased production.
In agriculture, homeopathic nosodes and autonosodes can assist in controlling plagues and diseases by use of the same disease of the plant, the plant damaged by the plague, or even the actual plague. Nosodes used in humans and animals are defined as homeopathic remedies prepared from diseased tissue or the product of disease, but are not defined chemically. Nosodes can be derived from animal, human or plant products. They can be complex compounds (of pathological secretions or excretions, infected tissues or causal organisms) or simple compounds (such as pure microbial or viral cultures).


Possibilities in agriculture

Utilizing homeopathic dynamizations on plants guarantees non-toxicity, because their mode of preparation assures that plants will in no way be contaminated. Agro-homeopathy is a win- win solution for farmers. They can use this method with confidence that it will neither damage the organism, the soil nor the plants.

Autonosodes represent the most immediate way to extend the use of homeopathy to farmers. They only require the plant damaged by the disease or plague, along with bottles and alcohol with which to prepare the dynamization. It is an easy, uncomplicated and immediate process that counters the damage caused by the plague or disease.

Agro-homeopathy has enormous potential as it covers the majority of crops and enables crop abundance and nutritive yields. Therefore further investigations must be performed to strengthen the advances already achieved in developing this science.

Important benefits of agrohomeopathy include economic savings and preservation of the natural ecology. Agro-homeopathy can reduce costs from agrochemicals, and it will not damage the organism, the ground under the plant or its surrounding area and the water that serves as the solvent in the dynamizations.
To elaborate further , the mother tincture is generally produced in an hydro-alcoholic solution of 87%. Dynamizations use 87% alcohol as a solvent, which if applied to the plant as is, would be toxic. That is why in agrohomeopathy we use distilled, boiled, tap or irrigation water in the two last dynamizations. This helps guarantee that there is no toxicity to the plant. The therapeutic effect is due to the initial substance of the mother tincture and the process of dynamization. This also reduces the costs.

Summarizing, the low costs of homeopathic potencies are represented by the following aspects:
The initial substance can be from the same disease of the plant, or from insects which attack the plant when an autonosode is produced. This minimizes costs because the farmer usually has the disease plant on his parcel of land. Dynamizations are generally produced in 87% alcohol, which is used to conserve the characteristics of the substance from which the dynamizations are prepared, but they can also be produced in water (with the exception of the mother tincture, when it is used immediately and if no further dynamizations are required).

The preparations can also be made in pure cane alcohol of 96%, expediting the production. The effect is the same whether produced in pure cane alcohol (96%) or in an hydro-alcoholic solution of 87%. Homeopathic dynamizations are not limited to the potency of 12CH. In general, low dynamizations (6CH), medium (12CH and 30CH) and high potencies (200CH, 1000CH, 10000CH) are used in humans, and are available commercially. Therefore, if a high dynamization is required, the producer will only be limited by the costs of commercial potencies. A tangential link to the savings is the increase in production volume due to the diminished damage caused by plagues and diseases.

The peculiarities of homeopathy and agro-homeopathy are: the theoretical foundation based upon natural therapeutic principles and the procedure that is in accordance with these principles. Prepared on these principles and with this procedure, homeopathy is able to heal diseases in humans, as well as solve health and nutrition problems in plants.

If there exists a certain analogy between the response of plants and of humans to dynamizations, then it must be considered that low potencies (6CH, 9CH) are to be applied for acute symptoms and damages in plants, medium potencies (12CH, 30CH) for problems with the tendency to a certain chronicity, especially in fruit trees. In some cases, these analogies can be applied; however, the zigzag effect requires more investigation into recognizing which dynamizations act most energetically. Thus, achieving the biological optimum does not necessarily correspond with the application of how low or high potencies are used in humans.

Agro-homeopathy in the ecological environment is harmless for the user. This is important, due to the fact that the use of agrochemicals and especially pesticides, frequently causes injury and sometimes death of farm workers. It is inhumane to use these chemicals if it is known that a poison can be inhibited by the same poison when it has been prepared homeopathically, and therefore, one can avoid injury and death of many humans. Agro-homeopathy and homeopathic potencies do not contaminate land or people and help support the regeneration of the ecosystem. The ground on which the potencies are applied is not at risk of increasing its salinity; the potencies do not injure micro flora and fauna, or the aquifer mantles.

Agrohomeopathy can also reverse damage already present in the ground because of the use of fertilizers or pesticides, or excessive salinity. There is already scientifically verified evidence supporting the relevancy of applying dynamizations to plants before and during sowing, or directly on the ground.

If the current agricultural practices in Mexico continue , then in the future Mexicans will be more dependent on the health industry, thereby allowing America to exercise greater control over Mexico, not only as an underdeveloped country, but also as a country dependent on medicines produced by transnational companies.
How to use homeopathic products in agriculture?

• Add one drop of the product to one liter of water, shake forcefully for one minute. Spread this dilution by means of an aerosol upon the plants.
• For backpacks or major volumes take this prepared liter and mix it with the water in the container.
• Seeds can be treated by immersing them in this solution for 20 minutes.


Some practical recommendations for the use of homeopathic remedies with plants:

Silicea
For slowly growing plants, attacks of mildew and other fungi. Rachitic plants. Interruptions of growth. Delay in production.

Carbo vegetabilis
After attacks of defoliating insects, water deficiency, change of temperature, flowers falling off, bud death, plants in compact soil.

Apis mellifica
For very thin plants due to high production, varieties with low heat tolerance, low fertility of pollen, falling off of flowers and fruits.

Calcarea phosphorica
Hydric stress, apical decay in fruits, acute sensibility after high production.
Magnesia carbonica
Abortion of flowers, absence of bloom, sensibility to low temperatures, excess or deficiency of magnesium or calcium.

Staphisagria
Attacks of plant louses (aphids), nematodes or mites (acarians), for plants with excess of shadow.
Nux vomica
For plants intoxicated by agro-chemicals.

Sulphur
Excess transpiration, for plants demanding fertilizers.

Arnica
For plants in mild climates (cold climate) during heat periods, after elimination of buds, after crops which have damaged branches. (Always when there is a mechanical damage of tissues.)

Calcarea carbonica, Calcarea phosphorica, Calcarea fluorica
For plants not responding to fertilization, of slow growth, necrosis on the border of leaves.

Chamomilla
Cham is utilized to increase absorption of nitrogen in plants.

Carbo vegetabilis
Can be used to reactivate bio-fertilizers in a balanced form.
Can be used together with Nux-v to decontaminate water.

Cina
To control nematodes, plagues and bacteria.

Valeriana officinalis
This remedy is efficient to provide disease resistance and also to activate phosphorus.


Examples of the use of homeopathic remedies


Cane plants infected with Xanthomonas albilineans and treated with Oscillococcinum 200 CH



Aplication of Cina 200 CH to plantlets of phiA 18 in an in-vitro culture.
A: before application & B: 21 days after application


Comparison of radish plants. On the left side, plants which were treated with Calcarea carbonica 30 CH, Calcarea phosphorica 30 CH, Calcarea fluorica 30 CH. On the right side untreated plants.


Perspectives of the use of homeopathic products in agriculture

• Control of viral, bacterial and mycotic diseases
• Control of plagues
• Control of contamination in in-vitro culture laboratories as well as bio-fabrics
• Amelioration of conditions for in-vitro plants in the phase of acclimatization
• Amelioration of nutritional absorption
• Germination of seeds


References

1.-E. RIVAS (UNAH ) y col. Accin de 9 frmacos homeopticos sobre la germinacin de esporas de Alternaria solani y semillas de trigo y jitomate. (Boletin Mexicano de Homeopatia, 1996).
2.- Influencia del arsenicum album en la germinacin de las semillas de cafeto (Coffea arabica L.). La homeopata de Mxico 2004, 628: 3-7.
3.-Accin de cuatro frmacos homeopticos en el control de contaminacin por bacterias. La homeopata de Mxico 2003, 622: 11-12.
4.- Brizzi M, Nani D, Peruzzi M, Betti L. Statistical analysis of high dilutions of arsenic. British Homeopathic Journal (2000)89, 63-69
5.- Betti L, Brizzi M, Nani D, Peruzzi M. A pilot statistical study with homeopathic potencies of Arsenicum album in wheat germintion as a simple model. Br Hom J 1994; 833: 195-201.
6.- W. Pongratz, PC Endler. Reappraisal of a classical botanical experiment in ultra high dilution research. Energetic coupling in a wheat model. Ultra high dilutions. Physiology and Physics. Ed. PC. Endler y J. Schulte. Kluwer Academic Publishers. Dordrecht, 1994, p 19-26.
7.- Betti L, Brizzi M, Nani D, Peruzzi M. Efecto de diluciones altas de Arsenicum album en plantas de trigo provenientes de semillas envenenadas con la misma substancia. Br Hom J 1997; 86: 86-89.
8.- Betti L, Lazzarato L, Trebbi G, et al. Efectos de arsnico homeoptico en la resistencia de la planta de tabaco al TMV: sugerencias tericas sobre la variabilidad del sistema, basado en un conjunto grande de datos experimentales. Homeopathy 2003.
9.- Khanna K and Chandra S. (1978). A homeopathic drug controls mango fruit rot caused by pestalotia mangiferae henn.Experientia; 34 (9):1168
10.- Meneses Moreno N.; Gonzlez Alvarez L. R. (2003).Accin de 4 frmacos homeopticos en el control de la contaminacin por bacteria.La homeopata de Mxico, 622: 11-12.
11.- Ruiz Espinosa Felipe. (2001). Agrohomeopata: una opcin ecolgica para el campo mexicano.La Homeopata de Mxico. Vol 70 Julio-Agosto, No 613; 110-116.
12.- Santos Rodrguez J., Fernndez Argelles C. R.. (1997) Accin del Argentum nitricum sobre la germinacin y el crecimiento de Phaseolus vulgaris Lin. La Homeopata de Mexico. Septiembre-Octubre; p. 147-151.

———————————————

Niurka Meneses Moreno (Mexico)
niurkameneses@yahoo.es

[c-ray]

interview with Homeopathy For Farm And Garden Author Vaikunthanath Das Kaviraj http://www.worldproutassembly.org/ar...omeopathy.html

and a whole bunch more links here -> http://www.homeopathyworldcommunity....anathdaKaviraj

[dpn]

Quote:

Bare soil cultivation is the first and could be called the fungus miasm. Because there is no organic content in the soil, the soil fungi are forced to attack the living crop - they have to live too and this guarantees their survival. The second miasm relates to spacing - the stress miasm. The third is connected to the nutrients - the junkfood miasm, characterised more by excess NPK and not enough micronutrients. The fourth is related to the suppressive treatment of pests and diseases - the poison miasm.

These problems caused by the wrong cultivation methods then set up reactions in the form of diseases and pests, which are invariably treated wrongly - even in so-called organic gardening. For in all these methods the focus is on the disease or the pest, while the suffering plant is not given any attention other than noticing its condition. This is the wrong approach and will remain a wild-goose-chase forever. It is the plant which suffers the pest or disease and thus it is the plants that needs treatment. Therefore it is the plant that requires our undivided attention, taking into consideration all of the above.

the truth shall set us free good read that... thanks!

[c-ray]

Homeopathic drugs Arsenicum album and Sulphur affect the growth and essential oil content in mint and essential oil content in mint (Mentha arvensis L.) (full text)

http://periodicos.uem.br/ojs/index.p...File/6642/5599

Quote:

Besides the advantage of low costs and since homeopathy doesn't leave any residue in the environment, it is one of the most promising tools to be used in agroecological systems.

[c-ray]

Homeopathic Solutions and Alleopathic response of Conyza bonariensis L.

http://www.tede.ufv.br/tedesimplific...odArquivo=2262

google translated

Quote:

2.4. History of Homeopathy in agriculture

CASTRO (2001), the use of homeopathic preparations in agriculture began with the Austrian Rudolf Steiner in the city of Koberwitz, Germany. During the lectures, Steiner suggested the use of preparations for farmers worried about the degeneration of grains and seeds of various crops. These preparations differ from homeopathic preparations in the form of dynamization, but are governed by the same principle of similarity.

In 1999, more precisely on 19 May the Ministry of Agriculture in the Official Gazette published the Instruction No. 7 which is directed at organic production in the country, recommending the use of homeopathic preparations on plants and animals. Since then, the use of homeopathy in agriculture has led to rural health. Unlike pesticides that suppress the vitality of the plant causing losses to the environment, contamination of soil, water and air, homeopathy aims to strengthen the defense system of the plant, from the secondary metabolism, balancing it in your environment (DUARTE, 2003 ; CASALI et al., 2006).

According to the Ministry of Agriculture, about 17 to 19% of the organic production is located in southeastern Brazil with the largest concentration in the South reaching 50% of production with organic practices (MAPA 2006). In organic farming, the owner or the employee does not use conventional techniques, pesticides. Instead, practicing the conservation of its soil and its water. The system is considered as a living organism, and it is treated by Homeopathy (ARRUDA et al., 2005).

Hahnemann applied his knowledge in the therapeutic use of high dilutions. The therapy of Hahnemann was not studied in medicine or practiced at the time, much less conventional medicine of the present day. Farmers likewise practice the principle of similarity with their plants, soil and the entire cultivated lands (CASALI et al., 2006). Homeopathic Farmers do not practice conventional agriculture and are increasingly moving towards Agroecology. The homeopathic substances are applied in its true principle of the act by encouraging healing mechanism of the plant as defense against diseases and pests (ARRUDA et al., 2005). Homeopathy treats everything that has life: soil, plants and animals (ARENALES, 1999). It is the instrument of valuing life as predicted Hahnemann. In short, the goal of homeopathic treatment is the welfare of the living organism so that it can express its true nature (Bignardi, 1999).

MORENO (1999) quotes the statement of Egypt: the creation endowed the human being from all backgrounds so that I could live in harmony in the environment. However, the planet was unstructured man disorganizing the lands, waters, plants, animals living organisms as a result bringing unstructured thanks Galenic practices that suppress the disease rather than bring them in their natural environment. The application of pesticides has brought more sickening plants and animals and therefore man who feeds these resources has directly suffered increasingly intoxicated with poisons that plants absorb when "treated".

The endorsement given by Hahnemann in his reports when he predicted that "if the laws of nature that proclaim are true, then they can be applied to all living beings" justifies the use of Homeopathy in agronomic systems. Research this feeling began to arise mainly in Europe and India and more recently Brazil. The works aim to the effects of homeopathic preparations on growth and plant development, pest and diseases, production of medicinal plants and others (Bonato, 2004).

In 1993, Brunini and Arenales, cited by Castro and CASALI (2001) reported valuable experiences in the use of homeopathy Staphysagria in vegetables and ornamentals. The treatment resulted in increased resistance to aphids and conditions. Research centers such as the Federal University of Viçosa and University of Maringá started trials in order to know the reactions of plants exposed homeopatizadas substances. Many studies have reported that plants, unlike humans, the increase in dynamizations not necessarily increasing the physiological reaction causing progressive. Thus, the pathogenesis is independent of dynamics is therefore necessary to use several dynamizations until it can evaluate the response of the preparation used (Bonato, 2004; CASALI et al., 2006).

The standard treatment of plants follows the same Hippocratic model of humans, although it already has for many years the homeopathic materia medica of humans and animals unfortunately not yet available homeopathic plant matter, and this absence considered major obstacle in the advancement of research with vegetables. The plants are treated centrifuge, from the inside out, inside out, the highest ranking to the lower hierarchy. Major internal changes are the expression of secondary compounds, ie, the response of the organism occurs in plant biochemical levels (Moreno, 1999; Bonato, 2004).

Russian researchers announced that all living beings beyond the physical body have the body or what Hahnemann bioplasmatic titled Life Force. Thus, any disturbance of the plant is by biotic or abiotic first action will have on the lifeblood of the plant (Bonato, 2004).

Organic production does not use pesticides and agro-ecological and homeopathy the relevant use these systems aimed at the biological balance of cultivated plants and the agroecosystem (CASALI, 2004). The homeopathic product leaves no residue, so there is no restriction on its use in agriculture. After nurturing and balancing the soil a few problems occur in cultivation. Homeopathy does not pay income taxes is with supporters of healthy life (ARENALES, 1999).

Wild plants, secondary metabolism is improved compared with other plants. Defense chemicals in them when inserted into the human body act therapeutically being called drug-active. These plants also known as medicinal, the variations are thoroughly understandable, because these chemicals produced respond to the presence of dilute solutions and streamlined thus justifying the choice of such plants as testers of homeopathic preparations (CASALI, 2004).

[c-ray]

little forum here:
http://www.homeopathyworldcommunity....icultureplants

[dpn]

The south american tree bark called Pau D arco has anti-fungal properties... a homeopathic or homeographic solution made from this bark could be a good defense against bud-rot (botrytis)?