Benveniste's Nature article

by Dana Ullman, MPH ©2007

Research team

The research team who conducted the research published by Nature was led by Professor Jacques Benveniste of the highly regarded French National Institute for Scientific Research in Medicine (INSERM--the equivalent to America's National Institutes of Health). Dr. Benveniste is a leading allergist and immunologist who declined President Mitterand's appointment to head this French research institute. This research was replicated by scientists at the Hebrew University, University of Toronto, and University of Milano.

Research overview

The researchers utilized the "Human Basophil Degranulation Test," which is commonly performed in Europe but is virtually unknown in the U.S. Basophils are a kind of white blood cell which play an important role in the allergic response, and this test helps to determine to which substances a person is allergic.

Basophils contain granules which are made of histamine and other chemicals which can elicit symptoms of allergy when they are released or degranulated. A substance to which a person is allergic causes degranulation of the basophils.

There are certain substances which will cause anybody's basophils to degranulate. IgE is a special type of antibody which causes the release/degranulation of basophils, and "anti- IgE" is an artificial (man-made) antibody can have a similar effect as IgE.

What was revolutionary about the research of Benveniste and his colleagues is that they diluted anti-IgE 1:10, then shook it vigorously, diluted it again 1:10, then shook it again vigorously. They repeated this process of serial dilution with shaking as many as 120 times. It was calculated that it was unlikely that there was even a single molecule of the original anti-IgE after diluting this solution just 14 times.

Homeopaths call the pharmaceutical procedure of dilution and succussion (vigorous shaking) to be "potentization." For the past 200 years they have asserted that the microdoses maintain biological activity and clinical efficacy when they are potentized and if they are correctly prescribed.

Debunking the research

Nature published this research with the stipulation that they could send a team to observe a replication of the experiment. The team included Nature's editor John Maddox, magician James Randi, and anti-fraud investigator Walter Stewart.

Under their supervision, the experiment was first replicated three times without any blinding of the experimentors (an procedure that the original experimentors never utilized). All three experiments showed positive results. The fourth experiment blinded the person doing the counting of the basophils, and the results of this experiment were again very successful. The Nature team deemed this experiment invalid, though this criticism presumed that the blinded experimentor knew in advance which test group she was counting (an implausible critique).

The next three experiments blinded the person doing the counting and the person doing the pipetting. All three of these experiments did not show any difference between the microdoses and the control group. The Nature team immediately deemed that there is no evidence that the microdoses have biological action.

Problems with the debunking

1. The Nature team ignored one blinded experiment which showed the biological action of the microdoses.
2. The Nature team presumed to have disproved Benveniste's five year's worth work in two days of experiments.
3. The Nature team did not include an immunologist, and thus they did not know that white blood cells are not always sensitive to large doses of antibiotics, let alone microdoses of them.
4. The Nature team created a disruptive environment in the laboratory which was not conducive to scientific investigation. James Randi performed magic tricks during a crucial part of the experiment, making it difficult for the experimenters to perform their work, while Walter Stewart was acting so hysterically that he had to be asked several times to stop shouting by John Maddox and by Jacque Benveniste.
5. The original work showed that heating, freeze-thawing, or ultrasonation suppressed the activity of the highly diluted solutions. This fact suggest that the microdoses are sensitive to various external stresses and that a couple of experiments that do not "prove" its action may have some unknown factor inhibiting its action.

Future research

Dr. Benveniste is confident in this research, and he has predicted that it will be replicated yet again by other researchers. The French homeopathic pharmacy which funded Dr. Benveniste's work has let it be known that they are willing to fund replication of this study by independent investigators.

The serious threat that the microdose phenomena and homeopathy poses to science and medicine is clear and evident by the strong antagonism that the initial research created. The fact that the critics ignored and continue to ignore the numerous other studies which support the action of the microdoses is further evidence of this denial and ultimately of an unscientific attitude.

The best source of homeopathic books, tapes, home medicine kits, and software is:

Homeopathic Educational Services

2124B Kittredge St.

Berkeley, CA 94704

(510) 649-0294

(510) 649-1955 (fax)

E-mail us

DANA ULLMAN, MPH, is one of America's leading advocates for homeopathy. He has authored 10 books, including The Homeopathic Revolution: Why Famous People and Cultural Heroes Choose Homeopathy, Homeopathy A-Z, Homeopathic Medicines for Children and Infants, Discovering Homeopathy, and (the best-selling) Everybody's Guide to Homeopathic Medicines (with Stephen Cummings, MD). He is the founder of Homeopathic Educational Services, America's leading resource center for homeopathic books, tapes, medicines, software, and correspondence courses. Homeopathic Educational Services has co-published over 35 books on homeopathy with North Atlantic Books. Dana writes a regular column for the wildly popular website, www.Huffingtonpost.com (to access these articles, click HERE!).

STATEMENT ABOUT DANA ULLMAN, MPH, by DAVID ANICK, MD, PhD., Harvard School of Medicine: 

"You are the Jon Stewart of homeopathy, the way you combine information ("gee I didn't know that!") with humor.  And you avoid defensiveness, which is terrific."