Does Water Have A Memory?

[Turtle]

Apparently there's a nocebo effect as well. People who have been wrongly diagnosed with a condition have ended up developing that condition, far too often for chance. Kind of makes a mockery of objective testing when belief can overrule biology. :) More evidence that the universe is created by consciousness rather than the other way round.

Bullshit. :)

[current]

Apparently there's a nocebo effect as well. People who have been wrongly diagnosed with a condition have ended up developing that condition, far too often for chance. Kind of makes a mockery of objective testing when belief can overrule biology. :) More evidence that the universe is created by consciousness rather than the other way round.

Off the OP , A-wal

[Turtle]

Off the OP , A-wal

The OP is bullshit as well. We have endured this insidious meme of water memory here for a decade and not a shred of legitimate supportive evidence has been forthcoming. Your bunch of goddamn nonsense is none the better and as welcome as hemorrhoids.

[current]

The OP is bullshit as well. We have endured this insidious meme of water memory here for a decade and not a shred of legitimate supportive evidence has been forthcoming. Your bunch of goddamn nonsense is none the better and as welcome as hemorrhoids.

So you haven't watched the videos about the subject at all .

 

Or you have but can't wrap your head around the evidence shown .

[Turtle]

So you haven't watched the videos about the subject at all .

 

Or you have but can't wrap your head around the evidence shown .

It's not evidence, it's bullshit. And you are a troll.

[current]

It's not evidence, it's bullshit. And you are a troll.

 

The politics of science .

 

You have no natural propensity towards science , it is obvious .

Edited March 22, 2017 by current

[exchemist]

I must admit that I haven't read the rest of the thread and it does seem like a nonsensical claim. I stand by my strawman comment though.

 

I came across something similar recently, that water has a fourth phase and that it's in this phase in our cells. That's an interesting one.

If I look this up on the internet, all I get is articles from something called the "Waking Times" [missing letter, perhaps? :) ], and some bearded charlatans trying to sell alternative books and health gimmicks.

 

They seem to claim there is a molecule "H3O2". That will be either an odd-electron molecule (free radical) or an ion and they have forgotten to include its charge. So clearly there is something wrong with the explanations I have been able to find.  

 

Do you have a reference to any reputable source for this idea? If you have, I'd be most intrigued to read it. 

Edited March 22, 2017 by exchemist

[exchemist]

Apparently there's a nocebo effect as well. People who have been wrongly diagnosed with a condition have ended up developing that condition, far too often for chance. Kind of makes a mockery of objective testing when belief can overrule biology. :) More evidence that the universe is created by consciousness rather than the other way round.

Here is an article on the nocebo effect. http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/what-is-the-nocebo-effect-5451823/

 

As written, it seems fairly unsurprising. Subjects who are told to expect symptoms such as pain, nausea etc, tend to do so more often that those who are not told this. (My favourite example is those who are told to expect erectile dysfunction tend to experience this. Well, any fool could have told you that telling a guy he won't be able to get it up is very likely to be self-fulfilling! :) )  

 

But that is not the same as your claim that objective medical conditions can be induced by suggestion. Do you have a reputable source for that claim? 

[current]

 

Lets get back to the OP ,shall we .

 

Otherwise go to biology threads to discuss your philosophy and ideas .

[exchemist]

If I look this up on the internet, all I get is articles from something called the "Waking Times" [missing letter, perhaps? :) ], and some bearded charlatans trying to sell alternative books and health gimmicks.

 

They seem to claim there is a molecule "H3O2". That will be either an odd-electron molecule (free radical) or an ion and they have forgotten to include its charge. So clearly there is something wrong with the explanations I have been able to find.  

 

Do you have a reference to any reputable source for this idea? If you have, I'd be most intrigued to read it. 

Further note: I may have found what lies behind these fanciful claims. There is or was a guy at South Bank Poly (now "university") called Martin Chaplin, who some years ago proposed a mechanism for how cells concentrate ions, involving structured oligomers of water: http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/16005/title/Structured-Water-Is-Changing-Models/

 

I noted the following paragraph: " Charlatans have seized on the principles. Stephen Lower, a retired chemistry professor at Simon Fraser University in British Columbia, maintains a Web site to catalog claims such as seven-sided water containing "mono-atomic minerals" to "clarify" the nervous system, structured water conducting "healing alpha-theta frequencies," and other quackery.⁶ Such claims distort what is a far more subtle and theoretical pursuit. Lower says that models such as Chaplin's are "consistent with X-ray diffraction data and meet the tests of a good scientific model, in that they provide plausible explanations of the unusual properties of water."

 

It is a shame this happened, of course. But nonetheless, if you read the whole article, you will see it had not at that time (2004) gained much support. And I can find nothing since - apart from many references to Martin Chaplin on pseudoscience or quack websites. So it rather looks as if the idea went nowhere, scientifically. 

 

 

But I'd still be interested to see what sources you have come across, since I have not devoted much time to this. As a chemist I would be fascinated to see what electronic structure is proposed for H3O2.  

[exchemist]

Regarding the whole subject of novel claims for water, this site may be a useful guide to some of the nonsense that proliferates on the topic: http://www.chem1.com/CQ/

[current]

 

Nothing on this debunkes water memory .

[current]

 

Further on youtube , the mystery of water ; at 30:06 min. Into this video ,

 

The application of the water theory is applied .

[A-wal]

If I look this up on the internet, all I get is articles from something called the "Waking Times" [missing letter, perhaps? :) ], and some bearded charlatans trying to sell alternative books and health gimmicks.

 

They seem to claim there is a molecule "H3O2". That will be either an odd-electron molecule (free radical) or an ion and they have forgotten to include its charge. So clearly there is something wrong with the explanations I have been able to find.  

 

Do you have a reference to any reputable source for this idea? If you have, I'd be most intrigued to read it. 

I don't know much about it but luckily I remembered the EZ water term, a Dr. Pollack came up with it. http://chemistry.stackexchange.com/questions/5925/ez-water-fraud-or-breakthrough  Looks like it's been hijacked by people trying to claim that his research proves the health benefits of ionised water but he never made that claim.

 

Here is an article on the nocebo effect. http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/what-is-the-nocebo-effect-5451823/

 

As written, it seems fairly unsurprising. Subjects who are told to expect symptoms such as pain, nausea etc, tend to do so more often that those who are not told this. (My favourite example is those who are told to expect erectile dysfunction tend to experience this. Well, any fool could have told you that telling a guy he won't be able to get it up is very likely to be self-fulfilling! :) )  

 

But that is not the same as your claim that objective medical conditions can be induced by suggestion. Do you have a reputable source for that claim? 

I've just recently heard of it and that's what I was told, with the example of false diagnoses of cancer but I can't find anything to support that. I presume it's just the exact same effect as a placebo but it's given a different name when it's a negative outcome so it shouldn't really be thought of as something different. Can the placebo effect actually cure an objective medical condition or just treat the symptoms?

[OceanBreeze]

Stupidly blatant strawman alert! Are you seriously saying that something that in your own words "has absolutely nothing to do with the claim that water has a memory" can in some way invalidate the claim, the claim that it has nothing to do with?

 

I've come across this claim a few times before. It's an interesting claim and it seems like a strange one to make up, unless it's an attempt to validate something else like homeopathy. It would be very interesting if there's something to it.

 

 

Well, strawman arguments can work both ways. It is a stupid blatant strawman argument to say (as they do in the video) that a river has a memory of where it has been based on what it collects along the way; somehow supports the idea that water has a memory. You seem to think that in my dismissing such a ridiculous claim that I am the one making a strawman argument.

 

Apparently, you don’t even understand what a strawman argument is, just as you don’t understand what the constancy of the speed of light means, and you never will.

[A-wal]

Well, strawman arguments can work both ways. It is a stupid blatant strawman argument to say (as they do in the video) that a river has a memory of where it has been based on what it collects along the way; somehow supports the idea that water has a memory. You seem to think that in my dismissing such a ridiculous claim that I am the one making a strawman argument.

 

Apparently, you don’t even understand what a strawman argument is, just as you don’t understand what the constancy of the speed of light means, and you never will.

LOL! Says the person who makes mistake after mistake and thinks that objects can't move faster than light relative to each other. I explained to you over and over again why that's not true and you still didn't get it, or more likely did get it but didn't want to admit it because of how stupid it made you feel. You even thought that objects moving faster than light relative to each other from the perspective of a third object somehow lead to a preferred frame of reference and you thought that time dilation and length contraction applies without changing reference frames for F's sake, when the constancy of the speed of light is the cause of tie dilation and length contraction when changing frames.

 

Nobody who makes a mistake that fundamental should expect to be taken seriously on the subject!

 

 

I haven't seen the video but I seriously doubt they were claiming that a river carrying things along in a current in any way supports their claim that water has memory.

[OceanBreeze]

LOL! Says the person who makes mistake after mistake and thinks that objects can't move faster than light relative to each other. I explained to you over and over again why that's not true and you still didn't get it, or more likely did get it but didn't want to admit it because of how stupid it made you feel. You even thought that objects moving faster than light relative to each other from the perspective of a third object somehow lead to a preferred frame of reference and you thought that time dilation and length contraction applies without changing reference frames for F's sake, when the constancy of the speed of light is the cause of tie dilation and length contraction when changing frames.

 

Nobody who makes a mistake that fundamental should expect to be taken seriously on the subject!

 

 

 

 

More incoherent babble from the uneducated know-it-all.

 

So! You still think light travels at 0.5c with respect to something that is moving?

You need to get an education before you are even worth the trouble of replying to.

 

I haven't seen the video but I seriously doubt they were claiming that a river carrying things along in a current in any way supports their claim that water has memory.

 

 

Well, just take current's advice, and watch the video!