Can The Structure Of Water Be "Altered" So It Is More (or less) Beneficial To Health? Get the facts, or the facts will get you. And when you get them, get them right, or they will get you wrong. Dr. Thomas Fuller, Gnomologia, 1732 |
|
Can The Structure Of Water Be "Altered" So It Is More (or less) Beneficial To Health? Get the facts, or the facts will get you. And when you get them, get them right, or they will get you wrong. Dr. Thomas Fuller, Gnomologia, 1732 |
I prepared the discussion below in response to questions visitors ask about the truth of claims made by manufacturers and distributors of 'altered' or 'enhanced' water products (or devices) that allegedly increase the health benefits of various 'treated' water - over drinking regular water.
Promotions for these 'enhanced' water products claim that the physical properties and/or energy characteristics of water molecules can be altered by some treatment to produce a wide range of general health benefits. Claims are also made that the structure/energy of water produced by distillation and reverse osmosis is actually harmful to health and that 'acidic' water is harmful or 'alkaline/ionized' water is beneficial to health.
Promoters for 'enhanced' water products often criticize science as being so inflexible and scientists as so arrogant that their new processes for treating health issues are ignored and vilified without being given a fair chance. That is, of course, complete self-serving nonsense. In truth, as so eloquently stated by Carl Sagan in The Demon-Haunted World, "...at the heart of science is an essential balance between two seemingly contradictory attitudes -- an openness to new ideas, no matter how bizarre or counterintuitive, and the most ruthlessly skeptical scrutiny of all ideas, old and new. This is how deep truths are winnowed from deep nonsense."
Any new ideas, processes, products &/or services proposed by 'enhanced' water marketers (or any new health treatment) are, in fact, welcomed by the scientific community. However, they like all new scientific ideas, are subject to "the most ruthlessly skeptical scrutiny". If they can be demonstrated to perform as advertised they become part of scientific truth - if not, they become part of the rejected "deep nonsense".
Can 'Enhanced' or 'Altered' water products influence health?
Short answer:
No - - - - &
- - - -
Illusionary.
|
No:
I have found absolutely NO reliable,
published, reproducible, scientific evidence after years
of searching the medical literature and other reliable
sources:
|
||||||||||||||
|
|
Illusionary:
There are a number of reasons that an an 'altered'/'enhanced'
water product can appear to be effective, and there
are a number of marketing and presentation strategies that
are used effectively to enhance this appearance, or illusion,
of effectiveness.
|
Manufacturers employ considerable creativity and
imagination in the development of a new 'Enhanced' Water product.
Three elements of the marketing strategy are critical:
|
|
|
Alleged 'Altered'/'Enhanced' Water Treatments:
|
'Altered' Water Claims:
|
People may indeed experience perceived
health benefits after they drink water allegedly 'enhanced'/'altered' by
treatments like Nikken Pi Mag, Willard catalyzed, alkaline, oxygenated,
John Ellis, Penta, Quantum Aqua or countless other 'flavors' of 'altered'
water.
The well documented placebo effect is powerful enough that people's
expectations and beliefs about how a product will work can actually
cause the expected experience - particularly for vague,
difficult to measure outcomes. The placebo's evil twin the nocebo effect
is probably responsible for any negative effects experienced from
drinking water produced by distillation or reverse osmosis.
This article discusses the placebo effect and proposes a
BEET score to rate the effectiveness of products that are
able to trigger the placebo effect.
Penn and Teller's Placebo Effect episode further illustrates how suggestion and an uncritical willingness to believe can explain not only people's perceptions about some alleged treatment but this belief can explain whydownright fraudulent companies are successful in marketing their products, services or ideas. It is important to realize that intelligence really has nothing to do with acceptance of fraudulent products, services or ideas - acceptance depends almost entirely on the skill of presentation, a lack of specific knowledge or experience in the subject, a desire and willingness to believe and a failure to engage critical thinking skills.
Scan through the claims attributed to various types of 'enhanced'/'altered' water treatments listed above and to the left (these are official claims taken verbatim from various company websites). Notice that they are nearly all vague and difficult to accurately measure (quantify). Examine the first seven: Increased hydration, Enhanced oxygen delivery, Better overall health, A more positive attitude, Boosted metabolism, Detoxification of the body and Helps joint & muscle. It is extremely unlikely you will ever find a precise description of these expected results - descriptions, for example, that would specifically outline:
One reason the official health benefit claims for these products are deliberately vague is because it is easier to convince someone they have had a positive experience when there are no precise goals to meet nor specific before-and-after measurements to compare. The main reason precise outcomes are never mentioned, though, is because the health effects of these products are illusions; so it would not be a good marketing strategy to provide specific, measurable expectations for their customers. It is also illegal for a company to advertise claims that a product will treat a specific disease unless the claim can be proved scientifically.
Since the companies that manufacture and market 'altered'/'enhanced' water products are unable to provide scientific evidence that their products successfully treat specific diseases, those claims are made by the independent representatives who make the claims (and provide uncontrolled testimonials as proof) that arthritis, diabetes, cancer, etc. can be successfully treated.
If you are considering the purchase of an alternative treatment, product or service, ask the representative for specific scientific evidence that the the product is effective at producing a specific health effect and carefully review the evidence for validity (ask a local high school chemistry or biology teacher for advice, for example). Do your own blinded experiment, if possible, to verify some specific testable claims (more energy, better sleep, decreased stress, etc) for yourself before you make a purchase.
The reality, however, is that any alleged health effects for any 'altered' water products cannot be distinguished from untreated water in well designed, blinded studies. Without any valid scientific evidence to support their health claims (or the theories behind those claims), those who market these 'enhanced' water products or services must rely on testimonials (personal observations) of alleged users. Although these testimonials may passionately support the product/service, there are many good reasons (in addition to the placebo effect) NOT to trust testimonials when you are making a decision that might affect your health and the health of your family.
Where does all the convincing marketing hype leave the consumer?
Often at the mercy of the 'altered'/'enhanced' water merchant. Just one
illustration of the dilemma: Every shred of available scientific
evidence supports the conclusion that the oxygen dissolved in bottles of "oxygenated water"
would only slightly benefit
fish and other aquatic creatures swimming in it, not land-dwelling humans. Yet perfectly intelligent people, who are
not scientifically informed, report that they feel more energetic after
paying for and drinking a $1.95 bottle of oxygenated water.
Much like the performance of a good magician, those who market these
'altered'/'enhanced' water products skillfully use techniques proven to
bolster belief and guide expectations that their product is an effective treatment for some health issues.
These techniques include:
You, the customers -- like the magician's audience -- get to see exactly the outcomes the 'altered'/'enhanced' water promoters want you to see -- an effective illusion.
Before you go to a sales meeting for one of these 'alternative'/'enhanced' water products, watch a YouTube video of a good magic act and observe how the audience is distracted from reality by a skillful presentation (the outcomes are all illusions despite the appearance of reality). The magician carefully guides their expectations and hides reality. The audience only experiences the outcome the magician wants them to experience.
At a sales meeting, watch how the expectations of those in attendance are carefully 'guided' by the presenter, and any requests to provide real scientific supporting evidence are usually deflected. There are exceptions, like alkaline water, where there is a lot of what appears to be scientific supporting evidence available. In these instances, it is only with significant effort that it becomes obvious that the evidence provided does not really support even the most basic and fundamental marketing claims.
So, companies conduct their alchemy and market oxygenated, micro-clustered, alkaline, energized water and similar products. If the marketing presentation is well done, though; if you sincerely want to believe the product will work for you; if you believe the sales person is trustworthy and honest; if you believe all the testimonials that are presented are true; and if you do not have the experience or background to evaluate the evidence presented, it can be difficult to remain a skeptic and quite easy to become a customer.
Then, if some customers perceive (for whatever reason) that the product works, more testimonials are collected, and those are used to lure more customers -- and the cycle continues. If other customers do not perceive that the product is effective, no one may ever know because, unlike a scientific study, there is no requirement (or desire) to carefully collect, analyze and present ALL of the evidence that might be available - or control for the many alternate reasons a product might appear to be effective.
A very interesting and informative Reality TV Series could be developed to scientifically test the claims of a wide range of consumer products on volunteers and "publish" the results on National TV. Unfortunately, that will never happen because the TV stations depend on advertising revenues from products with marketing claims that would be very susceptible to exposure as misleading at best and occasionally downright fraudulent.
Your mind is perfectly capable of creating the same health benefits you would experience when drinking any of the 'enhanced' or 'altered' water products just by thinking about what you want to experience. It seems though, that for most people a 'prop' (or totem) of some kind is necessary to jump-start the placebo effect and create the necessary expectation and beliefs that lead to a perceived health benefit. The 'altered'/'enhanced' water products can provide effective but expensive 'props'.
|
My suggestion: If you are convinced that any of the 'altered' water products are (or will be) effective, you can save your money by focusing your thoughts on a glass of regular water. Water is a truly extraordinary and magical substance - all life depends on it. |
So, take an ordinary glass of water and tap into that "magic"—meditate for awhile on the benefits you would like for it to create: drink the water: then experience exactly the same benefits as the 'altered' water product would have produced. If you need a 'prop' to trigger your mind's ability to create the health benefits attributed to 'altered'/'enhanced' water products, check out the Water Mandala site. Free Water Mandalas are offered with the claim that exposure of water (or other beverage) to a special mandala image will produce water with exactly the same physical and energy characteristics and will produce exactly the same health benefits as a wide range of 'altered' or 'enhanced' water products. An experimental design is also provided with details on how to compare the effects of the mandala-treated water with an 'enhanced'/'altered' water product to minimize bias.
Other pages on this site that related to this topic include: Evaluating Alkaline Water Claims and How to Identify Water Scams. You might want to read pages 1 - 11 of the book, On Being a Scientist (free to read online) for an important description of the characteristics that define good, ethical science. Those who develop and market 'enhanced'/'altered' water products almost never demonstrate these characteristics. This story provides an interesting introduction to the history of "snake oil" products - it is a chapter in an online book, Placebo Medicine by Morgan Levy, M.D. This site, maintained by a retired college chemistry professor, is devoted to exposing a huge number of specific scams and provides an excellent resource. An episode of the Andy Griffith Show (Season 6 Episode 23: The Gypsies, Feb 21, 1966) is an amusing illustration of con artists at work.Let me be clear too, that this discussion applies not only to 'enhanced'/'altered' water products but to ANY product or service that is sold to allegedly enhance health for which there is no valid supporting evidence - and there are thousands of such products sold on the Internet, in stores, in magazines, etc. If any product makes claims for which you can't find good, independent supporting evidence be skeptical, do not make a quick choice (ignore any special offers you might miss or the alleged dire consequences of waiting). Find someone like a science teacher who does not have a stake in selling the product and ask them to evaluate the claims for you.
I continue to ask a very simple, fundamental question that has never been satisfactorily answered by anyone I have talked with who markets or supports 'altered'/'enhanced' water products. That question is:
Ask that question to someone selling one of these products/services and see how many ways they can find to avoid answering the question or provide excuses to explain the complete lack of quality, supportive experiments.
The examples below (and the
claims quoted) are listed only as illustrations, and
definitely DO NOT represent my endorsement of (or belief in
the value of) the products! Also, despite trying to
find examples that would be fairly stable in their presence and
claims over the years, there have been considerable changes - I have
attempted to document any changes I notice.
Clustered and Structured Water:
Penta Water - I'll start with one specific brand of 'altered' water because
It was probably the first 'altered'/'enhanced' water product I
paid any attention to after I started my website. I
actually listened to an early promotional cassette tape in
the late 90s that consisted of an interview with the
'creator' of the water. In my opinion, the interview was a
very clever mix of truth, nonsense, and truth used in the
wrong way (that is, true statements used improperly to
support a particular point).
Unfortunately, I no longer
have the tape (If anyone reading this has
access to this tape, I would be extremely interesting in
getting a copy and compare original claims with those made
today). The actual claims of the
process and effects of Penta Water have changed
significantly over the years. Several years ago (and still
listed on a bottled water information site) the 'energizing'
process was high energy sound waves, now apparently, on the
company website, it's spinning the water that creates the
'magic'.
2013 claims
on the company website:
"Penta's revolutionary, patented 13-step, 11-hour filtration and purification process includes spinning our water under high speed and pressure (cavitation). This extra step produces smaller, more readily absorbed water clusters, providing advanced hydration. Penta is the only bottled water that uses patented physics, not chemicals, to produce the purest water available..."
"Penta
Water is ultra purified, energized water that not
only fully hydrates, but may also help increase antioxidant
activity in your body. During the last decade, The Penta
Water Company has received numerous reports from consumers
regarding the positive effects of drinking Penta.
These various comments include references to feelings of
more energy, a greater sense of well-being, and even
improved appearance of skin. Penta Water is first cleaned using a
state of the art purification system to remove all
impurities. ...No other bottled water is as pure!
The
water then goes through the patented Penta process which
spins the water at high speed and pressure for 11 hours, and
as a result increases antioxidant activity."
2013 product claims on the
bottled water website include:
"Penta also undergoes a patented
physics process using high-energy sound waves that gives
Penta many unique properties. This proprietary
technology, known as the Penta Process, actually changes the
structure of the water. Penta is the only bottled water that
uses physics, not chemicals, to restructure its water. The
water is cycled through the Penta Process until a specific
set point of thermal energy is released for approximately
7-8 hours."
"Proof that Penta is restructured water: Penta has been shown through highly technical scientific testing (Raman spectroscopy) to have 30 percent smaller molecular water clusters. It has also been observed that Penta has a higher boiling point and higher viscosity than normal water. Penta's unique structure is also patented and has been verified in a published, peer-reviewed study conducted by scientists at Moscow's General Physics Institute."
"Research has shown that Penta water's unique properties
provide the following benefits:
* In-vitro studies show an increase in cell survivability
by 266%.
* In-vitro studies show that Penta water dissolves
calcium oxalate monohydrate (the main substance in 85% of
kidney stones) three times faster than normal water.
* In-vitro studies on human cells reveal that lab distilled
water DNA chromosomal mutation rates were 271%
greater than Penta water.
In addition, countless Penta drinkers have told us that, by effectively hydrating, they look and feel more youthful, energetic and all around better."
The James Randi Educational Foundation
had in their archives an interesting discussion on Penta
Water's, decision to try for the Foundation's 1 million
dollar challenge by proving their 'energized' water causes
seeds to germinate faster than using regular water. The
articles described the Foundation's attempts to persuade the
company to continue the challenge after they got cold feet. Unfortunately I just checked (2013) and the links
to the original exchange no longer
work. That's too bad, because they illustrate a common
pattern, where the manufacturer of a pseudoscientific-based
product is eager to gain scientific credentials (and in this
case win a million dollars) until it becomes obvious that
real science demands real evidence of effectiveness - at
that point the backpedaling and excused begin.
2015 update: These exchanges have
been retrieved from the Internet Wayback Machine, http://www.randi.org/jr/08-24-01.html,
http://www.randi.org/jr/08-31-01.html,
http://www.randi.org/jr/110201.html (about 3/4 of the way
down),
http://www.randi.org/jr/083002.html (about 1/2 of the way
down) and
http://www.randi.org/jr/121903lins.html
( just over 1/2 of the way down). For convenience, the
relevant content has been
consolidated here.
Zunami: Another type of clustered
water is a concentrate, no less.
Just add one ounce of concentrated water
to one gallon of unconcentrated water...
'Science' according to
Zunami™ bottled water::
"Zunami is highly purified water that has been raised to a high level of electromagnetic power through a proprietary process. It is designed to restructure water into hexagonally organized bio-molecular clusters(a), providing better intracellular water exchange (hydration at a cellular level).
In the human body, there are two basic types of water (biowater): Bound water and Clustered Water. Clustered Water(tm) is able to move freely through the cell walls(b) and is necessary to transport nutrients, remove waste, and maintain proper communication between the cells. Bound water, on the other hand, is water that becomes physically bound to other molecular structures and is unable to move freely through the cell walls(c). When we are young, our bodies contain a high level of this remarkable water and very little bound water. However, as we age, bound water becomes more predominant and free water levels decrease, hindering the effectiveness of literally thousands of metabolic functions and causing significant structural changes in our body’s tissues."
Zunami™ is highly purified water that has been raised to a
high level of electromagnetic power through a proprietary
process, the result is Hexa Structured Water™ (HSW). It
is this restructuring that makes these products so effective
in accelerated hydration through enhanced mobility. The
process begins with extremely pure distilled water and,
while it is exposed to special lasers and extremely strong
magnetic fields to create stable water "clusters". The process is designed to structure the
water molecules into clusters that are very mobile,
therefore entering the cell system very rapidly
and replenishing inter-cellular water.
(d)"
That's a real bargain at only $39.95 for
a concentrate that produces 8 gallons of HSW -
Never mind the company has the
biology completely backwards and uses impossible physics.
In truth:
a) Water simply does NOT form stable clusters
unless it is frozen - liquid, water forms very
transitory clusters that do not remain stable or have any
known/demonstrated biological effects.
b) Besides the fact that our cells
have membranes (not walls), water clusters cannot move freely into
cells -
water moves
through cell membranes as single molecules.
c) The text above makes "bound water" seem like a
problem. However,
water that is bound to proteins and other macro
molecules in the cell is necessary for them to function
properly.
d) There is no shred of evidence
provided to validate any of the claims made - either the alleged
clustering process or any beneficial health effects.
PiMag Water Treatment: I can not find anything on the sites below that describes how the magnetic or far-infrared technologies of Nikken's water system actually works. From what I can tell, it is mostly a carbon block filter - and a very expensive one at that (over $900 with shipping), with very expensive replacement filters. I could not discover the pore size, but from the contaminants removed, I would expect it would be 1 micron or smaller. My ideas about the additional 'altering' of the water by the other elements of the filter would fall into the discussion above..
The references below are listed for information only, and definitely DO NOT represent my endorsement of (or belief in the value of) this product! - RJ
|
PiMag Water System: "Pi water was originally discovered by Japanese scientists in the 1970s. Observation had suggested that the water from an isolated hillside stream had a remarkable effect on the plant life in the area. The scientists examined the environment and found that it contained an unusual collection of topographical features. The surrounding hills contained magnetite and calcium. The watercourse flowed over silicates, the material that forms natural crystal. The water from it was found to have an atypical combination of minerals, and was naturally alkaline. This alkalinity helps to balance the acidic diet and stress-induced acidity that is commonly experienced in modern life. Duplicating these conditions in the laboratory resulted in a form of this “pi water.” Magnetic technology was added, as a magnetic field assists in conditioning water without adding salt or other chemicals. (2015 quote)"
2009 update: Nikken, like Penta Water, has toned down the rhetoric on its corporate site over the past few years and now provides very few details on the processes involved in producing PiMag water.
One way to determine the actual
performance of a product is to look at the independent
certification.
NSF certification of the Nikken water system.
Type Nikken into the 'MANUFACTURER' search box and clicked
on 'Search by Manufacturer'. For an $800 investment I would
expect a product that was certified to be far more effective
than this.
The results in 2009 for the $800
Pi-Mag
13151 and the $600
Pi-Mag 13155
systems were:
Standard 42 - Aesthetic Effects
Chlorine Reduction, Class I
Nominal Particulate Reduction, Class I
Taste and Odor Reduction
Standard 53 - Health Effects
Cyst Reduction
Lead Reduction
MTBE Reduction
Turbidity Reductionion
VOC Reduction
2013 update: Nikken has discontinued the $600 & $800 systems above, and now offers a $56 PiMag sports bottle and shower system and a PiMag Waterfall water filter ($385) that seems to be a glorified pitcher filter containing some rocks and a magnet. I could no longer find any NSF certification for contaminant reduction.
Homeopathy:
There are two fundamental problems with homeopathy that prevent the scientific community from recognizing it as a legitimate treatment method:
My Day with the Homeopaths - Part I - by Steven Novella
"Yesterday I took part in a panel discussion titled, A
Debate: Homeopathy - Quackery Or A Key To The Future of
Medicine? hosted by the University of Connecticut Medical
Center. You might think that the title is a bit of a false
dichotomy, but in this case it is accurate, for the two
sides of this debate occupied far ends of the belief
spectrum with a wide gulf between us."
"After my presentation on the extreme scientific
implausibility of homeopathy, materials scientist Rustum Roy
presented his completely unconvincing case for its
plausibility. His strategy was to argue that the only
significant scientific objection to homeopathy (other than
the blind bias, prejudice, “homeophobia” - his term, and
materialistic assumptions of scientists) is that homeopathic
water does not contain any molecules of active ingredient. However, he argues, the key to material function is not
composition but structure, so we should be looking at the
structure of water and not what is in it..."
My Day with the Homeopaths - Part II - by Steven Novella
"Donald Marcus from Baylor did an excellent job of
presenting a review of the clinical evidence for homeopathy,
accurately conveying that the evidence is largely negative. Iris Bell, a protege of Andrew Weil from the University of
Arizona, had the job of distorting and cherry picking the
clinical evidence to make is seem as if it supports
homeopathy. Her strategy was typical, standard fare for CAM
proponents."
"First, she argued that we should accept clinical observations as reliable evidence. These are open-label or uncontrolled case reports, essentially the clinical experience of homeopaths. This is all a fancy way of saying anecdotal evidence, which over a century of scientific medicine has taught us is completely unreliable. I think anecdotes are worse than unreliable - they tend to lead us to conclusions we wish to be true rather than those that are true, and they can cause a false sense of confidence in the unwary."
One of the more notorious examples of the apparent
validation of Homeopathic claims was a 1988 paper published
in Nature that appeared to support the homeopathic claim
that water can retain a memory of substances that were once
dissolved in it: E. Dayenas et. al. Human basophil
degranulization triggered by very dilute antiserum against
IgE. Nature. 1988 Jun 30;333(6176):816-8. "The latter can be
demonstrated at dilutions of anti-IgE that range from 1 x
10(2) to 1 x 10(120); over that range, there are successive
peaks of degranulation from 40 to 60% of the basophils,
despite the calculated absence of any anti-IgE molecules at
the highest dilutions. Since dilutions need to be
accompanied by vigorous shaking for the effects to be
observed, transmission of the biological information could
be related to the molecular organization of water."
The response from the scientific community was
immediate and skeptical, and many subsequent efforts to duplicate the
study have failed.
The episode is described here,
here, and
here.
According to
this review,
"Further experiments carried out by Benveniste's team, in double-blind conditions overseen by Maddox, magician and pseudo-science debunker James Randi and fraud investigator Walter Stewart, failed to verify the original results."
BBC Horizon show tries to win James Randi's 1 million dollar challenge in 2002 by proving homeopathy works. History & challenge; YouTube (#1, #2, #3, #4, #5) Transcript of the event; Q&A with James Randi. Note: This challenge was not actually about testing the effectiveness of homeopathy - it explored a claim that high dilutions of a substance (the foundation of homeopathic theory) had some measurable effects.
Dr. Ben Goldacre weighs in on homeopathy.
Searches on Homeopathy-related articles from edu sites and from .gov sites.
Doctors in one study successfully eliminated warts by painting them with a brightly colored, inert dye and promising patients the warts would be gone when the color wore off. In a study of asthmatics, researchers found that they could produce dilation of the airways by simply telling people they were inhaling a bronchiodilator, even when they weren't. Patients suffering pain after wisdom-tooth extraction got just as much relief from a fake application of ultrasound as from a real one, so long as both patient and therapist thought the machine was on. Fifty-two percent of the colitis patients treated with placebo in 11 different trials reported feeling better -- and 50 percent of the inflamed intestines actually looked better when assessed with a sigmoidoscope ("The Placebo Prescription" by Margaret Talbot, New York Times Magazine, January 9, 2000).
Forty years ago, a young Seattle cardiologist named Leonard
Cobb conducted a unique trial of a procedure then commonly
used for angina, in which doctors made small incisions in
the chest and tied knots in two arteries to try to increase
blood flow to the heart. It was a popular technique -- 90
percent of patients reported that it helped -- but when Cobb
compared it with placebo surgery in which he made incisions
but did not tie off the arteries, the sham operations proved
just as successful. The procedure, known as internal mammary
ligation, was soon abandoned ("The Placebo Prescription" by
Margaret Talbot, New York Times Magazine, January 9, 2000).
{Excellent description, discussion, and examples - RJ}
Placebo effects - Background: The benefits of therapeutic interventions in clinical practice are often enhanced by placebo effects. Placebo effects can be defined as the positive physiological or psychological changes associated with the use of inert medications, sham procedures, or therapeutic symbols within a healthcare encounter. Placebos can also be active substances or real procedures that produce unexpected beneficial effects. For example, antibiotics may be considered placebos when prescribed for viral respiratory illnesses that are not expected to respond to antibiotic action. Placebo effects may also be viewed as a subset of a larger group of mind-brain-body effects such as the psycho-physiological effects of religious beliefs and devotional practices, meditation, faith-based healing, hypnosis, and the effects of cultural and social economic systems on the prevalence and severity of specific diseases.
These effects have been scientifically documented by an increasing body of research. Mind-brain-body effects, including placebo effects, are not fully appreciated in contemporary medicine. {the article continues with an interesting description of the effect}
How People Are Fooled by Ideomotor Action - Ideomotor
Action: The "influence of suggestion in modifying and
directing muscular movement, independently of volition" - an
interesting phenomenon related to the placebo effect. This
article describes experiments that show how a person's
beliefs and expectations affect how their muscles behave.
More here -
Without Volition: The Presence and Purpose of Ideomotor
Movement - Ideomotor action is referred to as
"mischief-making" because its unrecognized presence is
actually the reason movement occurs in activities such as
dowsing, the play with the Ouija board and "facilitated
communication." In fact, any activity in which movement is
thought to be caused by forces that transcend our senses or
are described as metaphysical in nature should be suspected
to begin with movement that we don't consciously plan. The
word volition is especially important to this concept.
Defined as "the power of choosing; the act of making a
choice or decision; willful," volition is subtly different
than simple reflexive activity thought not to include the
higher centers of the brain. And, like a simple reflex, ideomotor movement occurs instinctively, though it is often
far more complex and always without volition. This is the
primary reason those doing it do not commonly take
responsibility for its manifestation or consequence. We
suppose ourselves to be consciously in control of our
movement for the most part, and it is difficult to convince
people otherwise under ordinary circumstances.
The Mysterious Placebo - One of the most significant but widely misunderstood phenomena is the placebo effect. Research shows that the placebo effect can be greater and is far more ubiquitous than commonly thought. More articles about the Placebo from the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry (CSI). The CSI mission is to promote scientific inquiry, critical investigation, and the use of reason in examining controversial and extraordinary claims.
From Placebo to Homeopathy: The Fear of the Irrational. The placebo effect is a perfect illustration of scientific exorcism of a disturbing fact (Dimitri Viza, The Scientist, Sep. 1998). Although its existence has been established beyond doubt, all efforts are directed not toward studying its mechanisms, but to subtracting its interference.
Scientific Framework of the Placebo Effect, by Gershom
Zajicek, The Cancer Journal - Vol10:5
The placebo effect is "any dummy medical treatment;
originally, a medicinal preparation having no specific
pharmacological activity against the patient's illness..." This definition summarizes the attitude of
modern medicine to a placebo: a useless and undesired
side-effect of treatment. Which is unfortunate, since a
placebo promotes healing. It may relieve pain, e.g.,
headache, and even modify the course of an illness. However,
medicine regards it as a sham treatment, tainted with
deception. Placebo is Latin for "I shall please", and was
used in the past to please the patient. Even as late as
1950, catalogs for physicians carried long arrays of pills
labeled "Placebo". All this has now vanished and placebo as
such is not used.
An ethical issue to consider as you research the Placebo Effect - If a product or treatment is shown to have some actual health benefits caused entirely by the placebo effect is it ethical to market the product or treatment as having a health benefit that's caused by smaller clusters, more energetic water molecules, different bond angles, water memory or some other completely unproven process with no scientific credibility or evidence?
Searches on placebo-related articles from edu sites and from .gov sites.
Water Absorption:
Absorption of Water and Electrolytes: The small intestine must absorb massive quantities of water. A normal person or animal of similar size takes in roughly 1 to 2 liters of dietary fluid every day. On top of that, another 6 to 7 liters of fluid is received by the small intestine daily as secretions from salivary glands, stomach, pancreas, liver and the small intestine itself.
Water and nutrient absorption: "An important function of both small intestine and colon is the absorption of water and electrolytes. Approximately 2000 ml of food and drink is ingested daily, and the volume of gastrointestinal secretions (salivary, gastric, biliary, pancreatic and intestinal) is about 8,000 ml daily; therefore, approximately 10 liters of fluid enters the intestine each day. Of the 8 liters secreted, about 1-1.5 liters enter as saliva, 2-3 liters are secreted by the stomach, about 2 liters enter as bile and pancreatic secretion (about 1 liter each), and about 2 liters are secreted by the small intestine. (Please note that these figures are approximate, not absolute. Volumes may vary, depending on experimental method and conditions.)"
"Of the 10 liters which enters the gut each day, only about 1 liter passes into the colon, about 90% having been absorbed across the small intestinal epithelium. Only about 150 ml is lost in the feces daily, with the remainder being absorbed by the colon. It should be obvious that any derangement in intestinal fluid absorption would profoundly influence the balance of fluid and electrolytes in the body, and that the normal functioning of the intestines plays a significant role in regulating water and electrolyte balance. The net absorption or net secretion of water in the intestine is the result of bidirectional movements of water from mucosa to serosa (m-->s flux or absorption) and from serosa to mucosa (s-->m flux or secretion). In the human intestine, these unidirectional fluxes exceed net movement 2-3 fold. The rate and direction of net fluid movement depend on tonicity of the meal, and move toward the achievement of isotonicity {equal concentration of water on both sides of a membrane - RJ}."
"The intestinal mucosal surface consists of a bimolecular lipid membrane, which (presumably) contains small pores or channels. Water and water-soluble substances can hypothetically enter the cell through these pores only, while lipid-soluble substrates can directly cross the lipid cell membrane. Specialized protein pores, referred to as aquaporins (AQP) have been identified in many tissues, including colon epithelium; water channel isoforms in small intestinal epithelium remain to be discovered. Intestinal absorption of water is a passive process and requires movement of solutes. Water accompanies solute and moves across the intestinal mucosa in response to osmotic gradients. The rate of water uptake in any region of the intestine is a function of solute absorption in this region. "
"All areas of the intestines (including small bowel and colon) absorb water, the relative amounts absorbed depending on the presence of solutes {things dissolved in water, sodium, calcium, sugar, etc. - RJ}, and the types of solutes present. In the jejunum, the active transport of sugars and amino acids causes passive movement of salt and water, which accounts for most of the water uptake in this area. In the ileum, most water movement is accounted for by active sodium transport. As described in Johnson (Gastrointestinal Physiology), coupled water and sodium transport involves a specialized mechanism that pumps sodium into the lateral spaces, resulting in relatively high osmotic pressure in that region. Water then enters the lateral space from the cell (transcellular flux) and--perhaps--the lumen (paracellular flux), reducing the osmotic pressure but increasing the hydrostatic pressure. Fluid is then forced out of the lateral space into the interstitial space. The net effect is that isotonic fluid is transported from the lumen into the extracellular fluid."
Aquaporins - the perfect water filters of the cell
Aquaporins are water channel proteins; they are located in
the otherwise water impermeable cell membrane of many plants
and animals. There they prevent bursting of the cells, e.g.,
due to changes of the exterior salt concentration (osmotic
regulation). In humans, aquaporins regulate the water flux
in the kidney, red blood cells, the eye lens, and the brain,
to name just a few..... *** The structure showed that the
protein forms a channel in the membrane that is 2 nanometers
(billionth meter) long and 0.3 nanometers wide, just
large enough for water molecules to fit through, such
that permeation of larger molecules is prevented.***
Aquaporins are proteins embedded in the cell membrane that regulate the flow of water. They are "the plumbing system for cells." Aquaporins are integral membrane proteins from a larger family of major intrinsic proteins (MIP) that form pores in the membrane of biological cells.
Aquaporins: Water Channels - Water crosses cell membranes by two routes: by diffusion through the lipid bilayer and through water channels called aquaporins. Functional characterization of the first aquaporin was reported in 1992, but water channels were suspected to exist well before that time, because the osmotic permiability of some types of epithelial cells was much too large to be accounted for by simple diffusion through the plasma membrane. A single human aquaporin-1 channel facilitates water transport at a rate of roughly 3 billion water molecules per second. Such transport appears to be bidirectional, in accordance with the prevailing osmotic gradient.
Hi Margaret
I am glad you enjoyed my website.
Your questions actually fall into three categories:
I guess the easiest way to approach the topic
of alleged health benefits of 'altered' water is to ask - What criteria
would you, personally, accept as validation of the claims for a
particular product??
Criteria
a) Your own experience with the product.
Criteria
b) The word of someone you know who experienced the product.
Criteria c) A celebrity endorsement or the word of a sales person.
Criteria
d) A discussion on a website or in a book that lists the experiences of many
people who used that product - Would it make a difference if the person making
the claims has some higher degree (PhD, MD, DC, etc.) after his/her name?
Criteria e) A peer reviewed paper* in a medical or scientific journal that has looked at the
blinded or double blinded** effects of the product on a large number of people and compared the measured
effects to those from a control group of people who used
a similar, but presumably inactive, mimic of the product being tested (a
placebo). A cross-over component can also be added where the treatment is
switched during the study (again the subjects and perhaps the experimenters
unaware of the switch).
Back to top
This site provides a detailed procedure you can use to compare the effectiveness of
products while minimizing bias.
A summary of a blinded experiment to test claims for 'altered' or 'enhanced' water would involve giving one group of subjects 'altered' water over a period of time and giving the control group the same amount of purified but not 'altered' water (without either the subjects or the experimenters knowing who is getting what). All product claims (more energy, better hydration, etc.) would be carefully measured and recorded for each group.
After several weeks, the water would be switched (without the
subjects or experimenters knowing when) and measurements would continue. After the
experiment was completed, the results would be tabulated and
a preliminary analysis made of the measured outcomes. Finally, the
results would be unblinded and fully analyzed (blinding during the preliminary analysis phase minimizes any unconscious
bias on the part of the statistician). If there were real, beneficial health effects of the 'altered' water,
the data would ONLY show real, positive differences in the results recorded when the
subjects drank the 'altered' water.
To the best of my knowledge, there has never
been a peer reviewed paper published in ANY medical or scientific journal that
conclusively
validates ANY of the physical or health claims made by the proponents of ANY of
the various types of 'altered' water.
Although an occasional supportive
paper have been published, the conclusions have not been supported by subsequent
studies - see below.
Companies selling 'altered'/'enhanced' water usually support their claims with variations of criteria (a), (b), (c), or (d) above. These are examples of Anecdotal Evidence or Testimonials. You are basically taking someone's word that a product is effective (or relying on your own experience).
Anecdotal evidence
is not necessarily false or bad (in fact that is probably how most valid scientific theories got started), but
with anecdotal evidence there is no way to determine whether the experienced
effect was caused by the product, by chance, or because of an expectation of what the product
should
do - the placebo effect described below.
When
health claims are made for expensive products with nothing but anecdotal evidence to
support the claims, I am extremely skeptical. There is absolutely no enforced regulation of ANY of the
claims made by these 'altered' water companies beyond those imposed on
"normal" bottled water. The companies are usually very careful to
state that "They do not make any claims that the product treats or cures a
specific disease condition". If
they made such claims,
they would be regulated by the FDA and
would be required to provide scientific proof of the
claims.
The companies typically follow that disclaimer, however, by stating "look what it has done for all these people" - and then let the anecdotal health claims "speak for themselves".
There are papers published in alternative health journals that seem to support health claims of some 'altered' water products. These journals are biased toward non-traditional treatment methods. That is not a bad thing, necessarily, but one important characteristic of good science is that the results of a study can be reproduced by anyone at any time whether they are skeptical of the outcome or biased toward it — that is why blinding is so important. Blinding minimizes bias in either direction.
The mainstream scientific and medical communities pretty much ignore experimental evidence found in papers published by alternative health journals because historically the studies easily demonstrate biases of the researcher and are lacking in controls to minimize the biases. That is usually not the case if the claims are published in a mainstream scientific or medical journal. The scientific community will typically respond very quickly with a careful dissection of the study methods, results, analyses, and conclusions and then attempt to duplicate the study.
Mainstream scientific journals (which are skeptical toward 'altered' water claims) publish
very few papers that seem to validate 'altered' water product claims.
No published 'altered' water claims have been validated by later studies, to my
knowledge.
One of the more notorious examples a mainstream journal that published a paper
supporting
'altered' water claims is a 1988 paper in Nature that appeared to support the
homeopathic claim that water can retain a memory of substances that were once
dissolved
.
The episode is described here.
Two arguments are typically used to explain why research from developers and promoters of 'altered' water products is not found in mainstream scientific and medical journals:
Neither excuse is convincing:
Since 'enhanced' water claims have no scientific basis, the foundation has offered several 'enhanced' water companies, including Penta Water, the million dollar prize if they could demonstrate that their product worked as advertised. The companies were free to create their own experimental design and establish ANY outcome results and testing methods they chose - they only had to demonstrate that their product produced a significantly different outcome from the control group in a truly blinded and controlled study---there have been no successful challengers...
It is interesting to read reports from those who thought they might, in fact, be able to win the money only to fail during the initial trials or back out once they discovered that while they could design the experiment to test any claim in any way they wanted, they had to allow conditions that would detect or prevent cheating - even unconscious cheating. At that point, when their illusions could no longer be maintained during the tests, the challenge became unfair.
The financial rewards to a company that developed a proven, safe, inexpensive 'enhanced' water product that met all criteria for scientific acceptance and provided a significant health benefit (that was different than the benefit of drinking untreated water) would be enormous.
The truth is, companies that manufacture and market 'enhanced'/'altered' water products are not interested in performing experiments that will withstand skeptical scrutiny — most probably because they can't, but why bother even trying when people purchase their product anyway and report benefits.
Scientists believe the claims of 'altered'/'enhanced' water products to be non-issues - not worth bothering with, and are usually not willing to invest the time and money required to test the claims (the exception, as noted above, is when a paper supporting alternative water claims is published in a mainstream journal). Companies marketing the 'altered' water frequently state that scientific evidence is available to back their claims. Be skeptical and try to actually locate and read the paper that supports the claim. If there is no link provided, ask the company for a copy of the paper, and (if you ever receive it) take it to a local science teacher to get an opinion from someone who is not trying to sell you the product.
There is an additional complication in trying to assess the effectiveness of certain products that claim to produce health benefits, the Placebo Effect. The placebo effect is the observation that a person's expectation of how a product will work can sometimes cause the expected result even if the actual treatment was never administered. For example, a sugar pill given as a pain reliever to someone with arthritis might cause a reduction of pain in some individuals.
| It ironic that the scientific and
medical communities understand and study the placebo effect but usually
treat it as a nuisance that complicates "real" scientific experiments to
test "real drugs" that may be proven more effective than the placebo -
but often come with serious side effects. The alternative health community, on the other hand, embraces (and exploits) the fact that the mind, with a little guidance to stimulate belief and expectation, is often able to produce real relief for many health conditions. Unfortunately, belief and expectation, no matter how positive, do not always heal, and a delay in seeking medical therapy with proven, effective medical treatments can lead to serious health problems. There are several interesting debates in the scientific community regarding the ethics of doctor prescribed placebos (also) and of the use of placebos in clinical trials (also) when effective non-placebo alternatives are available. |
You mentioned that you have had positive experiences with several of these 'altered' waters. Is it possible that your positive experiences could have been 'colored' by your expectations of what the water would/should do? If you have access to some of these water types, you can do some double blinded experimenting on your own (neither you nor the person giving you the water samples would know which water you were drinking - and thus 'what to expect' from the water).
If you get together a small group of interested people, you might at least be able to test the idea (or hypothesis) that a person can tell by 'how they feel' if they are drinking 'altered' water or 'normal' water - the taste of the water would have to be very similar though. This page provided a good outline of how to test and compare the effects of different products without introducing bias.
Can water be killed - Is there such a thing as living water?
In answer to the claims that reverse osmosis (or distillation) renders water "dead" - I would generally use the same arguments as above. I have never heard of any 'vital force' being attributed to water (by scientists, anyway). Pure water will have a molecular structure of H2O and will be utilized equally well by the body regardless of treatment methods used. It simply does not matter whether water is treated by traditional purification technologies (filtration, distillation, RO, etc.) or by pseudo-scientific treatments, the structure, energy and behavior of the water molecules will be identical. I discuss the topic of water treated with distillation and reverse osmosis on this page.
I hope this helps. If you have any further questions, let me know..
The
Penta Water hydrates a bit better, but is currently cost prohibitive to drink daily. I had no expectations when I drank water from the Nikken System and was skeptical. I was given 3 samples of different waters, and the
Nikken water seemed like what my body was craving. I will follow your advise and see if I can obtain some scientific research on it.
For such an essential thing that we need to sustain life, the best drinking water is so elusive.
I've learned over the years that just because something is put on a shelf in a store or on the market that it's not necessarily safe.
Thank you for your continued pursuit of the answers and for sharing your knowledge so freely.
Margaret
Hi Margaret
I take the time to answer people who have questions in part because I am troubled by the rampant miss-information campaigns I see, not only on the internet, but in stores and in all the media. A good proportion of the marketing campaigns seem to be designed exclusively to separate people from their money.
If you constantly feel dehydrated despite drinking plenty of water, there may be some physical problem causing the feeling rather than the type of water you are drinking. I am not a physician, so I won't even hazard a guess, but I thought I'd bring that up as a possibility to consider.
Again, I encourage you to try some blinded tests over several day's of drinking various types of water to see if you can really tell the difference in the way the water hydrates your body in the absence of ANY clues as to which type of water you are drinking. It may be difficult to set up a truly blinded test though because, depending on the type or treatment and the materials left in (or removed from) the water samples - calcium, air, other trace minerals, etc. - the taste alone can provide clues to the type of water you are drinking.
Even the faintest hint of a suggestion about what to expect can subtly influence the mind to interpret subsequent events a particular way.
For example, in your experience with Nikken Pi Mag water, did the sales representative walk in, immediately offer you three identical-looking glasses of water to drink (with absolutely no comments or explanations about what the samples were or what you might experience), turn away while you sampled them (to not inadvertently give clues) and then ask you to record your impressions about each glass of water - again with no prompting about what you were drinking or what kinds of impressions to be thinking about?
That would be the ONLY way to reduce the possibility (probability) that the sales presentation influenced the outcome of the "test" - but then sales people are usually VERY interested in influencing the outcome of a demonstration! I suspect the stage was carefully set by the sales person so you knew exactly what each glass contained and what you were supposed to experience.
The response (unconscious usually) of the mind to the 'power of suggestion' can not be over-emphasized - that's why some sales people are so effective, and why experimental studies are so difficult to set up - the experimenters, the subjects, and even the analysis team can be subtly and unconsciously influenced by the minds' expectations.
An important part of the scientific review process I mentioned in my previous letter is to try to discover if expectations about the outcome of a study had any influence on how the scientists set up the study and recorded, analyzed, or interpreted the data. As one of the articles below mentions, "even the course of an illness" can be affected by the mind's ability to modify the body's response to an event (again, the placebo effect).
In the case of the "test" where you sampled Nikken Pi Mag water, any of the situations outlined below would be more than enough to predispose your mind to accept a particular sample as "better than" the others.
In the discussion below, situations 1 and/or 2 ' would set the stage' for the mind to be thinking about the great things that will happen when the Nikken water is sampled.
Then, with a positive expectation, any knowledge about the identity of a sample (situations 3 and/or 4), no matter how slight, can allow a difference in the samples to be "detected".
Anyway, I wanted to reiterate my current thoughts and concerns on the subject of 'altered' water. To the best of my knowledge (and the water chemists I have contacted), as far as the body is concerned, water is water! You will want to drink pure, safe water, but I have not yet encountered ANY information (that I would accept as scientifically valid) that would convince me that there is any way to modify water so that it is either absorbed into the bloodstream from the intestines or into the cells themselves more efficiently than untreated water (or that it can move nutrients or waste products through the body any better). ANY WATER should hydrate your body and provide transport for nutrients, gases, and waste products perfectly well!
Two facts that make it unlikely for the clustered water products you mention to have any effect on the body:
The
special clusters would have to disassemble to move out of the intestines, reassemble within the bloodstream
for transport throughout the body, and disassemble again to move into other cells. The accepted model
of water transport
provides no mechanism to explain how water
clusters or other forms of 'altered' water could possibly benefit to the body -
even if the clusters could be created, stabilized, and controlled.
It is not possible for developers, producers, and marketers of 'altered'/'enhanced'
water products to integrate their fanciful theories and claims with conventional
scientific theories, so they employ testimonials to support their claims and
depend on the fact that the placebo effect will produce enough positive
experiences to keep their products selling.
If you are interested in exploring the "science" of these 'altered' waters, try to find someone at one of the companies who is willing and able to provide a detailed explanation of:
If you are able to get an explanation that addresses any of the questions above (or similar questions that you devise), I would be EXTREMELY INTERESTED in receiving a copy of the communication and the person's name and e-mail address.
I do not claim to know everything about this subject, but I do know enough to be extremely skeptical about certain claims without very good evidence to back up those claims. There is an important saying in the scientific community "Extraordinary Claims Demand Extraordinary Proof". Claims made by manufacturers and marketers of 'altered' water can be said to be "Extraordinary" because they fall outside the scope of mainstream scientific theories and conventional understanding of how the world "works".
Consequently, in order for the mainstream scientific and medical communities to accept any of the altered water claims as valid, those who produce and promote the products must:
I hope this additional information helps
Copyright © 2005, Randy Johnson. All rights reserved. |
Updated April 2015 |