“Allergic reactions are caused by the allergen interacting with IgE antibodies, bound to mast cell receptors and basophilic leukocytes, and the subsequent release of mediators” (Ring 1982). This is how the renowned German allergologist J. Ring summarizes the knowledge of allopathic allergology regarding Type I allergy: a historically proven theorem, accepted by all experts, regarding a mechanism that undoubtedly only takes place on the level of substantive biochemical immunology. How and where could there be space for physical mechanisms?
Initially, it seems rather unbelievable, or at least surprising, for us to assert that allergy is nevertheless a largely biophysical informational phenomenon. There is, however, clear-cut proof for this assumption:
1 If the material level conditioned allergies exclusively, it would be unthinkable to use the informational level for allergy testing. Among these test methods are: tests applied by electro-acupuncture; VAS (Vascular Autonomic Signal), the method developed by the French physician Paul Nogier within the framework of auriculomedicine; the different techniques applied by kinesiology; and, of course, our preference, the allergen resonance test.
2 Exclusive use of allopathic methods for allergy testing would be no explanation for the therapy successes yet to be discussed.
3 C. Smith and his team's sensational experiments at the University of Salford, England, are the most important and irrefutable proof to date. He examined individual people's reactions while in contact with their allergens. The group was exclusively made up of hyperergic patients, that is, people extremely sensitive to numerous substances (Smith 1989).
Initial research was based on the findings of J. B. Miller. He discovered in the 1970s that skin reactions of hypersensitive patients tested by means of the prick test did not diminish with gradual dilution of the allergen as was expected. Rather, among the many dilutions causing positive skin reactions, there would be one that suddenly caused no reaction at all. This result was reproducible. This particular dilution of the allergen, called “neutralizing dilution,” was the one that eliminated the symptoms when injected into the patient. Jean Monro and her team used this discovery in the early 1980s. They were surprised to find the same neutralizing effect when the patients held a glass ampoule containing the neutralizing dilution specific to them in their hand, even if the contents of the ampoule had been frozen (Monro 1984).
Monro and Smith eventually discovered that besides being hypersensitive to various chemical substances, foods, environmental toxins, etc., many people also react to particular electrical frequencies displaying the same allergic reactions. This is called electrical hypersensitivity.
Smith experimented with hypersensitive patients who reacted very strongly after only a few seconds of contact with the allergen. Symptoms experienced were strong headaches coupled with visual impairment, sudden paralysis in the legs, inability to move, confusion, inability to speak, or acute pain in arms, legs, joints, etc. These symptoms occurred after contact with the allergens known through chemical testing as well as under the influence of certain electrical frequencies.
Figure 3.1 shows the basis of Smith's research, initially using homeopathically potentized dilutions of the allergens:
Gradually increasing the potency shows that not only the allergens themselves, but also their homeopathically potentized dilutions, cause reactions well into the intangible area of high potencies. Here, too, the phenomenon observed by Miller reoccured: When gradually increasing the potency, among potency levels causing the expected negative effects (allergies), there were also potency levels that clearly showed neutralizing effects. Neutralizing potencies are reproducible in an individual patient. However, they are unique to each patient.
Fig. 3.1 Research by C. Smith with hyperergic patients using homeopathic potencies of their allergens (schematic).
Figure 3.2 illustrates experiences resulting from testing electrical hyper-sensitivity. The tests were conducted with a simple sinus oscillator that enabled the generation of any desired coherent frequencies. The patient was located at a distance of several meters from the oscillator. The frequencies were sent via a short antenna without touching the patient. Gradually increasing the frequency resulted in the same behavior as seen in the experiment using homeopathic potencies of an allergenic substance: specific (and in individual cases reproducible) frequencies causing the range of typical allergic reactions in the patient. However, they were interspersed with neutralizing frequencies that eliminate allergic reactions within a few seconds.
Monro and co-workers originally discovered that a neutralizing dilution of an allergen containing information is also effective when the patient simply holds an ampoule of the same dilution in his/her hand. As surprising as this may sound, this phenomenon was also valid for experiments using exclusively electrical frequencies.
Smith and his team experimented with water or water-based solutions (e.g., saline solution). Attached to the oscillator via a coil was a glass ampoule containing this solution which was “charged” for 4 minutes with the corresponding neutralizing frequency. Subsequently, in contact with the patient, this solution proved just as effective as the frequency generated by the oscillator in the patient's room. This sensational research held important results for medicine. All experiments quoted here have been conducted by Salford University according to strict scientific criteria. They have been documented by video, etc. and the results published in scientific literature. Given these new parameters, the response of the scientific community was surprisingly uneventful. Findings that do not fit into the familiar paradigm are initially doubted and often ignored, let alone discussed.
Fig. 3.2 Research by C. Smith with hyperergic patients using electrical frequencies (schematic).
What basic knowledge do the results of C. Smith's experiments convey to us?
1 Proof of the effectiveness of homeopathic high potencies also in the intangible area (beyond D23 = Loschmidt's number).
2 Proof of effectiveness of electrical frequencies in a living organism.
3 Proof that water has a memory function for electrical frequencies.
4 Proof of a component of allergy defined by physics, as all aforementioned phenomena are only explicable by physical mechanisms.
This presents two apparently opposing statements on the allergy phenomenon:
This apparent contradiction is resolved when we apply the previously instituted thought modality of two distinctly separated functional levels (Fig. 1.1). Let us remember that basically everything that functions in our organism on the material level is regulated by the codified information in the informational level.
The superior informational level (regulatory level) controls the impulse that begins and regulates processes on the material level.
If we apply this fundamental law to the arena of allergies, it seems that within the frequency pattern of a particular living being there is some type of biophysical “imprint”: a fixed information that registers the specific frequency spectrum of a substance as an allergen. Its presence and activation are the prerequisites for allergic reactions to take place in the body.
This biophysical imprint may be caused by repeated contact with a substance irritating the organism in one way or another.