The Great DBH Rant

A couple of pro-homeopathy blogs, as well as several homeopathy resource websites which I follow have hailed a publication by Dr Luc Montagnier, 2008 Nobel Laureate which allegedly proves homeopathic remedies are active. The paper in question is here (PDF). Dr Montagnier was credited with co-discovering the Human Immunodeficiency Virus. Big name attached to homeopathy again, like Professor Magdalene Ennis. I have already discussed her 2004 publication with regards to the effects of homeopathic dilutions of histamine on basophils previously.

The abstract of the Montagnier et al paper describes a new property of DNA, whereby high aqueous dilutions of some bacterial DNA sequences can induce electromagnetic (EM) waves.

It is not my intention in this article to criticise this particular publication. In fact, I found it quite interesting. I will not attempt to give technical opinions on this paper regarding methodology, since I do not have much background in EM waves. I hope physicists who happen to stumble across this article can give a more balanced opinion on the methodology involved.

However, one point which has to be made is that the paper is published in Interdisciplinary Sciences: Computational Life Sciences, a non-peer reviewed journal. The findings of such articles have to be taken with caution.

Another point about the article is that it appears to be a preliminary study. Results were simply reported as either “positive” or “negative” with no attempts at quantification or statistical verification.

The main finding of the paper was that bacterial DNA sequences diluted to between 10^-5M to 10^-18M give off specific EM waves at a different frequency which would be expected of background “noise”. At higher dilutions, nothing above background was recorded.

May I point out that at 10^-18M there is still DNA left? It is by no means homeopathic. In fact the authors acknowledge that at higher dilutions, the EM signals were indistinguishable from background.

The findings of the paper raises interesting questions about the properties of specific DNA sequences, and is certainly an area worth pursuing. However, it is not a paper that bears any relation to homeopathy.

It seems like any paper with the phase high aqueous dilutions written anywhere will pass off as evidence that homeopathy works these days.

Happy Talk Like a Pirate Day, me hearties! Arrrrrrr.

For the first time in my PhD, I get to step out of the British Isles “on business” – to Erice in Sicily. This is a wonderful, almost purpose built town for international conferences set at the top of a mountain, so the views were absolutely magnificent, as were the Italian sunshine, food and wine. The pics are on my website (www.baptista.co.uk). The meeting was on ion channels and transporters, so right up my street, or so I thought. The meeting turned out to be a week-long crash course on structural biochemistry. Lots of colourful pictures and lots of Nature quality work, but all going straight over my head as well. It would have been nice if there had been a bit more functional data so I could at least act like I belonged there. I did present a poster on my own work but since it didn’t contain a lot of fancy figures and structural implications (well after all we don’t have a crystal structure for the ryanodine receptor), it did not generate a whole lot of interest. Nevertheless, I met a lot of wonderful people who I full intend on keeping in contact.

Being a scientist – the long working hours, the loneliness in the lab, the frustration of stuff not working, and the all too often doubts as to whether the results I am painfully churning out even makes a difference to anyone. It is all too easy to lose yourself in your work (and this applies to all careers) and forget the bigger picture of what you are doing in the first place. Those who are good would remove themselves from the nitty-gritty details of everyday work regularly and look at the big picture. Why am I doing this in the first place? This is a simple task, but all too often overlooked.

So what is my “big picture”? I work on the heart, the big muscle pump that keeps chugging away whatever you are doing. I am trying to find out what iron does to it. Trivial it may seem but iron overload is a big problem in medicine. There’s acute iron poisoning, and there’s more genetic based causes, anaemic diseases and haemochromatosis. All these conditions lead to an increased level of iron in the body and at worst, it is fatal, most likely of cardiac complications. Treatments are available to control the symptoms but very little is known about how iron messes with the heart. This is where my work comes in – to decipher the mechanisms of iron-induced cardiomyopathies (cardio = heart; myo = muscle; pathies = diseases).

So is this work going to make a difference to anyone? I’d like to think so. It’s not going to lead to a miracle cure, or a Nobel Prize for my supervisor or myself, but it may be an inspiration for other scientists to open up new avenues of research into the problem which may (I said “may”) lead to a miracle cure. At the very least, this work is going to get me a PhD degree which will lead to a career, and ultimately pay the bills, and pay for a half decent lifestyle. Afterall, the realism of things is that there is life outside of work.

This is what I do. Something I am quite passionate about, because it’s my PhD thesis, so it’s my life and soul (or at least it is supposed to be).