Double Helix Water for Migraine, Diabetes, and Brain Tumor
I just read this article (Double Helix Water for Migraine, Diabetes, and Brain Tumor, April Acupuncture Today) on a whim as I rarely read AT because many of the published articles hold little interest to me.
About a quarter of the way through this article, I began to wonder if this was really an article or a paid advertisement that poses as an article, often seen in the daily newspapers (and on faux-newslike pop-up screens on the Internet). While Dr. Lo may be a researcher and product inventor, is it really in your best interest to have an article published by the inventor? It reads as more of a marketing ploy and comes across as a poor attempt to legitimizing AOM. If legitimizing AOM is the goal (as evidenced by the ACAOM's development of standards for the first professional doctorate, which in and of itself, is grossly misguided), then pieces like these do a huge disservice to this goal and to AOM. It also speaks poorly to the credibility of this publication, its editorial staff and contributors; and is patronizing to the readers.
There is a "call for practitioners" to "try" (does this mean "buy?"), when there is nothing substantial about this supposed intervention to indicate that it is nothing more than water. Dr. Lo, as a PhD, should understand the proper way to test a theory: Write a proposal, get institutional review board approval at the university, get a grant, recruit subjects, run a trial, compile the data and publish the results. He should be held to that standard because, as his credentials indicate, he should know better. However, I don't expect the editorial staff at AT (or most AOM practitioners, for that matter) to know the difference, and that's a shame.
Scott Alamar, LAc
via e-mail
I wish to comment on Scott Alamar's letter to the editor regarding my article Double Helix Water for Migraine, Diabetes, and Brain Tumor in the April issue of Acupuncture Today.
I completely agree with Mr. Alamar that there should be professional standards within scientific organizations, and no exception should be made for AOM. As proper protocol, one should understand an area of research before formally commenting on such. Therefore, I welcome him to read my book Double-Helix Water: Has the 200-Year-Old Mystery of Homeopathy Been Solved? (www.doublehelixwater.com), which summarizes the last 15 years of research on the subject and contains more than 300 pages of peer-reviewed published papers from myself and other distinguished scientists and medical doctors from noted universities spanning three continents.
Please note this passage taken from page 59: "All samples have been verified in the best labs in the country as water; ultrapure water thousands of times cleaner than the distilled you purchase at your local grocery store. ... The work and focus has been on discovering the fundamentals of water and how it applies to the healing process using hard-core particle physics, not statistical analysis, which is the norm within the health care industry."
If we are looking for more rigorous scientific investigation, I am afraid that I know of none that is above the rigors of the methodology that I have dedicated my life-long career to. There is no rigor above particle physics. Might I add that nearly all of the current allopathic health practices have been completely dependent upon the development of physics, from the gauges that read blood pressure to MRI and CAT scan machines.
My role now is to unite Eastern healing methodology with Western medical technologies to bring about a renaissance in health care. I do not write infomercials.
Yin Lo, PhD
Via e-mail