What is so unacceptable for ultra-orthodox scientists?
| The Current Theory: "structural matching" | The Proposed Theory: "electromagnetic signals" |
| Fig A | Fig B |
The 3D structure of the ligand molecule, e.g. an antigen (or an agonist) matches the 3D structure of the antibody (or the receptor, respectively). This physical contact induces the cell function. More about this... | The agonist molecule carries and emits an EM signal which coresonates with the receptor's molecules thus activating it and inducing the cell function. More about this... |
Summary Personal comments from J. Benveniste. The Current Theory: "structural matching"
The presently dominant QSAR (quantitative structure-activity relationship) theory of molecular signaling claims that two structurally matching molecular objects exchange specific information by mere contact. (Sometimes also refered to as the Key/Keyhole interaction model). Specific molecular interactions happen after random collisions between partners on a trial-and-error basis, using electrostatic, short range (two to three times the molecule size) forces. But this kind of random encounter, amidst the bulk of molecules which are foreign to a given biochemical reaction, would give to these meetings statistically little chance of occuring. Thus, the simplest biological event might require a very long time to happen. This paradox is still unexplained by those adhering to this theory...
The shortcomings of this approach are best illustrated by the now widely-recognized failure of "drugdesign" to produce the expected volumes of new therapeutic substances.
In this context, it is worth noting that the words "molecular signal" are routinely used by biologists, yet receive no precise physical definition.
The shortcomings of this approach are best illustrated by the now widely-recognized failure of "drugdesign" to produce the expected volumes of new therapeutic substances.
In this context, it is worth noting that the words "molecular signal" are routinely used by biologists, yet receive no precise physical definition.
 |
The Proposed Theory: "electromagnetic signals"
Using various experimental protocols we are able to activate specific cell functions with the corresponding low frequency (It is important to remark that these concepts do not violate any current biological or physical basic principle. It is well-documented that:
- 1) molecules emit specific frequencies;
- 2) a complex set of high frequency waves can produce low frequencies according to the "beat frequency" phenomenon,
- 3) all biological interactions occur in water, since, on the average, there are ten thousand molecules of water per molecule of protein.
|
In summary, the current short range electrostatic theory of molecule interaction-recognition via random collision cannot help us understand how biological reactions really work. The key/keyhole and the structural matching are just cartoonesque descriptions of the exceedingly more sophisticated mechanism which is required to command the extraordinarily complex and rapid cascade of intricate biochemical reactions supporting life. By contrast, the EM interactions afforded by the capacity of water to support long range EM fields provide fascinating possibilities for understanding:
- 1) the specific and rapid long distance attraction of coresonating mates;
- 2) how the formation of aggregates with appropriate frequencies initiates the next step in the biochemical sequence;
- 3) how the steric structure of molecules can be altered or stabilized by subtle changes in their primary composition.
