POSTER PRESENTATION ABSTRACTS
Please note: All posters will be displayed in
Salons 10-12.
THURSDAY, 5:30-6:15 PM
Bell IR, Aickin M, Lewis D, Lewis S, and Schwartz GE.
Gas discharge visualization patterns: A novel psychophysiological
approach to objective optical emission assessment of homeopathic remedy
effects in human subjects.
University of Arizona College of Medicine ibell@u.arizona.edu
Developing replicable objective measures to
assess concomitant multisystem effects of individualized complex systems
of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is a priority for researchers
in the field. Many CAM therapies involve alterations in presumptive
subtle energy patterns of the individual (e.g., homeopathy, qi gong,
acupuncture) prior to biochemical or cellular manifestations. Gas discharge
visualization (GDV) offers a novel biophotonic marker to test for the
initial interface events between an "energy-based" therapy vs placebo
and the person. GDV is a computerized charge-coupled discharge camera
measurement technology for quantifying optical emissions from an individual's
fingers in response to standardized high intensity electromagnetic impulse
stimulation.
The present double-blind placebo-controlled
study examined the GDV light emission patterns of undergraduate college
students' ten fingers (N=91, mean age 19.5, 58% women), analyzed using
the GDV Diagram software for concomitant multi-organ system effects.
GDV-grams (unfiltered) were done immediately before and after pairs
of sealed amber glass vials (identified by unique vial number but not
contents) containing equal numbers of pellets (5 gm) of one of three
different homeopathic remedies at 30c potencies (Nux Vomica, Lachesis,
Natrum Muriaticum) or placebo (e.g., four left:right conditions=Lachesis:Lachesis,
Lachesis:placebo, placebo:Lachesis, placebo:placebo) were placed over
each wrist for 15 seconds using elasticized exercise bands (to eliminate
the need for subjects to hold the vials). No direct skin or oral contact
was ever made with the remedy or placebo pellets per se. Testing was
repeated in randomized complete blocks for each remedy and placebo set,
and the 3 remedy/placebo sets were randomly ordered as well. Prior to
the laboratory session, all subjects completed the Homeopathic Constitutional
Type Questionnaire (CTQ) for later analysis to identify potential individual
responders (top 1/3 scorers for a given remedy) and potential non-responders
(bottom 1/3 scorers for a given remedy). Analyses compared these subgroups,
by remedy. Basic GDV values were computed as pre minus post for the
full control (placebo:placebo) condition. For the other three conditions,
GDV values were pre minus post, with the value for the control (pre
minus post) subtracted. All GDV values were standardized for each remedy
(yielding effects standardized as betas). Each responder status variable
was regressed in turn on each GDV value, for each of the four conditions.
Although 31 p-values would be expected to be below 0.05 by chance, 79
such values were found, especially for Nux Vomica and, to a lesser extent,
Lachesis. To limit Type I error, we focused on the lowest 48 p-values
as representing potentially significant effects.
Taken together, the findings are consistent
with the hypothesis that GDV can distinguish some patterns of individualized
biophysical effects of homeopathic remedies vs placebo tested at close
physical proximity through glass vials without direct dermal, oral,
or inhalation administration. The data are also parallel to prior replicated
tadpole research using nearby, sealed homeopathic remedy vials.
Back