The Amazing Meeting 2014

Like it? Share it!

Sign up for news and updates!






Enter word seen below
Visually impaired? Click here to have an audio challenge played.  You will then need to enter the code that is spelled out.
Change image

CAPTCHA image
Please leave this field empty

Login Form



Teaching Chemistry With Homeopathy PDF Print E-mail
Swift
Written by Kyle Hill   

As much as it riles up proponents of science-based medicine like myself, homeopathy can be a great teaching tool. But most of the time this opportunity is squandered. HeparArticles, lectures, papers, and talks critical of homeopathy quickly skip over the chemistry and the math that makes the philosophy so implausible. “The molar limit,” is casually thrown out as the smoking gun, but guessing that most people haven’t had a chemistry class after high school, this is potentially as bad as simply stating, “Water has memory.” What is more important is the why, the how, and of course the math.

I believe that you won’t get at an entrenched audience simply sounding the bulls**t claxon; you have to build upon the scaffolding most people already have, and work your way up to the skeptical position. In communication research, this is called schema theory, and it predicts that new information is best understood when you have some prior framework to understand it with.  

As Phil Plait said, “If you teach a man to reason, he will think for a lifetime.” Likewise, I believe that if you teach someone the reason why homeopathy can’t work, it is much more powerful. To that end, and just in time to dovetail with Steven Novella’s homeopathy debate, I aim to provide a neutral explainer below focusing on chemistry of homeopathy’s main claim—high dilution equals high potency.  

So what is the molar limit? What is Avogadro’s number? We have to start with the basics.  

Avogadro’s Number  

In the early 19th century Italian scientist Amedeo Avogadro proposed the idea that the volume of a gas is proportional to the number of molecules or atoms in that gas, regardless of its state (temperature, pressure, etc.). Fill a balloon with a liter of helium, as the theory goes, and you would be able to figure out how many helium atoms are inside.  

This formed the basis for the mole; a unit describing how many elementary particles (molecules, atoms, or ions) are in some standard amount of stuff. That standard was made to be exactly 12 grams of carbon-12 (a form of carbon with 6 protons and 6 neutrons). So, one mole of carbon-12 equals 12 grams.  

When you look at a periodic table, you’ll see numbers in the corners of the various boxes. One (typically bolded) is the atomic number—the amount of protons bound up in the atom. You’ll also see another number, the atomic weight—more or less the number of protons added to the number of neutrons in the atom. For carbon, the atomic number is 6 and the atomic weight is 12.011.  

Life on Earth owes everything to carbon, and chemists honor it by basing many of their measurements on it. They define the mass of other molecules or atoms in relation to carbon as a standard. So, it follows that the atomic weight of other atoms or molecules in grams is also equivalent to one mole. One mole of hydrogen, with an atomic mass of 1, weighs 1 gram, and contains the same amount of molecules as one mole of carbon. If this seems like a convenient way to do things, that’s because it is! This standardization has made the life of many a student that much easier.  

For example, water has two hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom. A mole of water would then equal the atomic weight of all the atoms in the substance in grams. Looking to a periodic table, one mole of water is 18 grams, and again those 18 grams contain the same number of molecules as there are atoms in 12 grams of carbon.  

A hundred years after Avogadro, American physicist Robert Millikan was able to measure the charge of a single electron. And because Michael Faraday had discovered in 1834 that a mole of electrons has a certain charge, dividing the two values resulted in an accurate description of how many atoms or molecules or ions are in one mole of a substance. As any recent chemistry student could recite by heart, it turned out to be 6.02*1023.  

So now we know what skeptics talk about when they mention Avogadro, but what does that have to do with homeopathy? Well, homeopaths bring the science down upon themselves, and it isn’t too kind.  

One Molecule in Many Universes

Now that we know about moles, we can evaluate the claims of homeopathy directly. Homeopathy states that the more you dilute a substance, the more potent is gets. But without making things too simple, in modern medicine “the dose makes the poison.” The smaller the dose, the smaller the effect. This isn’t really up for debate—it is the foundation of all pharmacology.  

If the chemistry of homeopathy cannot pass this very low bar of potency, there is no need to try to overturn other established science with “water memory” claims.  

Homeopathic remedies are typically prepared by diluting some original substance down, down, down. Let’s say that we want to make a remedy out of something with a molar mass of 100 grams (all the atomic weights of the molecule summed up). On the “X scale” developed by homeopaths, our remedy would supposedly get stronger every time we diluted it by a factor of 10. So, if I put 100 grams of the substance I want to dilute in one liter of water, I will have a solution with a concentration of 1 mol/L. At this point, 6.02*1023 molecules of my substance are floating around in the water. Then we start diluting.  

Going by factors of ten (according to what we have to do for the X-scale), by the time we reach 24 dilutions (24X), something troubling happens. If you divide 6.02*1023 by 1024 you get a concentration of 0.6 molecules per liter. That’s right, you have a whole jug of remedy with most likely not one molecule of your original substance.  

For perspective, you could drink a solution of arsenic and survive at a dilution of 8X.  

But it gets worse. At 60X, it would require giving two billion doses of our remedy per second to six billion people for 4 billion years to deliver a single molecule of the original material to any patient.  

And it still gets worse. At 400X, you would need to search the volume of 10320 universes to find just one molecule of our original remedy. But search in your local pharmacy and you will find homeopathic flu remedies at this dilution.  

Before we get into debates of “well it worked for me!” and water with “memory,” we have to start with what we know, and we know that the human body needs something to react to. Based on everything we know, a bottle of homeopathic remedy should produce the same reaction as a bottle of water. That’s precisely what the studies say.  

Building scientific literacy means building from the ground up. We don’t have to get tangled up in the buzzword-filled gumbo of alternative medicine to learn about homeopathy. Chemistry tells us pretty much all we need to know, and teaches us a bit in the process.  

For more about the homeopathy debate, check out Steve Novella’s recent posts.  

 

Kyle Hill is a JREF research fellow and popular science writer who contributes to Scientific American, Wired, and Popular Science. He writes daily at the Science-Based Life blog and you can follow him on Twitter here.

Trackback(0)
Comments (9)Add Comment
Another tactic, related...
written by Radwaste, March 28, 2013
I find it useful to ask the questions, "Drugs interact with the body by chemistry, do they not?", and after getting the affirmative, "Why do you not buy homeopathic alcohol, or gasoline, for that matter?"
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +11
Carbon-12
written by JonK, March 28, 2013
"carbon-12 (a form of carbon with 12 neutrons)"

This would appear to be a typo. Carbon-12 is a stable isotope of carbon containing six protons and six neutrons (along with six electrons).
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +4
Second Correction
written by JonK, March 28, 2013
"And because Michael Faraday had discovered in 1834 that a mole of electrons has a certain change"

Sorry...didn't catch this typo the first time. It should read "a mole of electrons has a certain charge".

I'm calling these typos out since this is intended as a tutorial. Please remove these two posts if the article is updated.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
Adulteration
written by MartinEV, March 28, 2013
When considering the more extreme forms of dilution, it suddenly occurred to me that everyone involved in the debate (on both sides) tends to handwave away the inconvenient question of what we are using to dilute down the active ingredient in homeopathy.

Surely it is slightly odd to talk about a search through 10^320 universes when, in reality, the practitioner is forced to use and reuse water which, even in its purest form, will also be riddled with a melange of non-H2O molecules.

We are therefore far more likely, certainly at 400x dilution and even at 60x or lower, to find examples of the active constituent accidentally reintroduced back in the solvent rather than the original activated substance. Unfortunately, we are also likely to find any one of a hundred (thousand? million? more?) other substances, perhaps even some of the molecules notoriously having once passed through Napoleon.

Justifying the effectiveness of some form of activated field when confounded by all these adulterants seems even more difficult than the classic model using hypothetically pure water for dilution.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +2
...
written by SciPhile, March 28, 2013
Thanks for catching the typos, corrections are on the way.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -1
...
written by jbsegal, March 28, 2013
This is a nice write-up, Kyle, but the problem I have is how to argue with the non-absurd dilutions.
A member of my family is fond of Peaceful Mountain's muscle rubs.
Active Ingredients: Arnica Montana 3X, Rhus Toxicodendron 3X, Phytolacca Decandra 12X, Pulsatilla 12X, Ruta Graveolens 12X

Now, That's not very much active ingredient... but it's more (for some of them) than various powerful steroidal anti-inflammatory creams out there, that contain .05% active ingredient - around a 4x dilution, I believe, if I haven't dropped a decimal someplace?

I'd love a good discussion of these 'low dilution' remedies that DO actually have (or could have) active ingredients in them. Everyone in the skeptical world seems to ignore them to focus on the blatantly absurd.

Help?
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -1
Reply to jbsegal
written by SciPhile, March 28, 2013
In your case you then have to look at the ingredients. Most of what you listed are flowers or plants with little medical use (even less if you dilute them). For example, Rhus Toxicodendron is simply watered-down poison ivy, and Arnica Montana has been shown to be no better than placebo. The concentrations here aren't ludicrous, but the ingredients many times are.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +9
...
written by aschaeffer, March 28, 2013
I have heard many debates on homeopathy, in which the homeopaths accept the absurd dilution and talk about the water "memory". They pull out many example of how structure matters more than chemistry. For example, carbon can be in the form of graphite (pencil lead), or it can be in the form of diamond. Same chemistry, different structure. They also like the example with a USB flash having memory makes as much sense and water having memory (somehow).

So what about the genuine absurdness of LIQUID water retaining thousands of different structures, based upon whatever the **** "remedy" someone used, with absolutely no explanation of what force makes the structure change or metastability?
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +2
Actually Arnica Montana can be effective
written by therealtori, April 02, 2013
Correction SciPhile, Arnica Montana has varied results. It is no better than a placebo for bruising, but at least one study has shown it is equivalent to ibuprofen when applied topically in sufficient concentration for osteoarthritis.

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00296-007-0304-y

So there is some justification for it, although the homeopathic dilutions are arguably of negligible benefit (references study was 50% concentration).
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +2

Write comment
This content has been locked. You can no longer post any comment.
You must be logged in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.

busy