Editing Water memory (section)

==Subsequent research==

In the [[cold fusion]] or [[polywater]] controversies, many scientists started replications immediately, because the underlying theories did not go directly against scientific fundamental principles and could be accommodated with a few tweaks to those principles.<ref name="ball" /> But Benveniste's experiment went directly against several principles, causing most researchers to outright reject the results as errors or fabrication, with only a few researchers willing to perform replications or experiments that could validate or reject his hypotheses.<ref name="ball">{{citation |title= Life's matrix: a biography of water |author= Philip Ball |edition= illustrated, reprinted |publisher= University of California Press |year= 2001 |isbn= 978-0-520-23008-8 |page= 328 |url= https://books.google.com/books?id=vPVdHwpkfu0C |author-link= Philip Ball }}</ref>

After the ''Nature'' controversy, Benveniste gained the public support of [[Brian David Josephson|Brian Josephson]],<ref>Brian Josephson, [http://www.tcm.phy.cam.ac.uk/~bdj10/water.memory/ns/homeopathy.html molecule memories], ''New Scientist'' letters, 1 November 1997</ref> a [[Nobel Prize|Nobel laureate]] physicist with a reputation for openness to paranormal claims. Experiments continued along the same basic lines, culminating with a 1997 paper claiming the effect could be transmitted over phone lines.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Benveniste|first1=J|last2=Jurgens|first2=P|last3=Hsueh|first3=W|last4=Aissa|first4=J |title= Transatlantic Transfer of Digitized Antigen Signal by Telephone Link|journal=Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology|date=January 1997|volume=99|issue=1|pages=S101–S200|doi=10.1016/S0091-6749(97)81064-0|doi-access=free}}</ref> This was followed by two additional papers in 1999<ref name=informed>{{cite journal|last1=Benveniste|first1=J|last2=Aissa|first2=J|last3=Guillonnet|first3=D| journal = FASEB Journal| title = The molecular signal is not functional in the absence of "informed" water| volume = 13|issue= 4|pages=A163}}</ref> and another from 2000, in the controversial non-[[peer review]]ed ''[[Medical Hypotheses]]'', on remote-transmission, by which time it was claimed that it could also be sent over the [[Internet]].<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Thomas|first1=Y.|last2=Schiff|first2=M.|last3=Belkadi|first3=L.|last4=Jurgens|first4=P.|last5=Kahhak|first5=L.|last6=Benveniste|first6=J.|title=Activation of human neutrophils by electronically transmitted phorbol–myristate acetate|journal=[[Medical Hypotheses]]|date=2000|volume=54|issue=1|pages=33–39|doi=10.1054/mehy.1999.0891|pmid=10790721}}</ref>

''Time'' magazine reported in 1999 that, in response to skepticism from physicist [[Robert L. Park|Robert Park]], Josephson had challenged the [[American Physical Society]] (APS) to oversee a replication by Benveniste. This challenge was to be "a randomized double-blind test", of his claimed ability to transfer the characteristics of homeopathically altered solutions over the Internet:<ref>Leon Jaroff, [http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,24440,00.html Homeopathic E-Mail], ''Time Magazine'', 9 May 1999</ref><blockquote>[Benveniste's] latest theory, and the cause of the current flap, is that the "memory" of water in a homeopathic solution has an electromagnetic "signature." This signature, he says, can be captured by a copper coil, digitized and transmitted by wire—or, for extra flourish, over the Internet—to a container of ordinary water, converting it to a homeopathic solution.</blockquote>The APS accepted the challenge and offered to cover the costs of the test. When he heard of this, Randi offered to throw in the long-standing [[One Million Dollar Paranormal Challenge|$1 million prize]] for any positive demonstration of the paranormal, to which Benveniste replied: "Fine to us."<ref>Jacques Benveniste and Didier Guillonnet, [https://web.archive.org/web/20010415020240/http://digibio.com/doc/nl1999-2us.txt DigiBio - NewsLetter 1999.2], "Demonstration challenge, etc." section</ref> In his ''DigiBio NewsLetter''. Randi later noted that Benveniste and Josephson did not follow up on their challenge, mocking their silence on the topic as if they were missing persons.<ref>James Randi, [http://www.randi.org/jr/01-26-2001.html Computer problems, a Nobel Laureate reneges, more magnetic shoes, the metric system, and ...], ''Commentary'', 26 January 2001</ref>

An independent test of the 2000 remote-transmission experiment was carried out in the US by a team funded by the [[United States Department of Defense]]. Using the same experimental devices and setup as the Benveniste team, they failed to find any effect when running the experiment. Several "positive" results were noted, but only when a particular one of Benveniste's researchers was running the equipment. "We did not observe systematic influences such as pipetting differences, contamination, or violations in blinding or randomization that would explain these effects from the Benveniste investigator. However, our observations do not exclude these possibilities."

Benveniste admitted to having noticed this himself. "He stated that certain individuals consistently get digital effects and other individuals get no effects or block those effects."<ref name=dod>{{cite journal | journal = FASEB Journal | title = Can specific biological signals be digitized?| volume = 20| issue = 1| pages = 23–28|date=January 2006| author= Jonas, Wayne B.
 |author2=John A. Ives |author3=Florence Rollwagen |author4=Daniel W. Denman |author5=Kenneth Hintz |author6=Mitchell Hammer |author7=Cindy Crawford |author8=Kurt Henry | doi = 10.1096/fj.05-3815hyp | doi-access = free| pmid = 16394263| s2cid = 23116745}}</ref>

Third-party attempts at replication of the Benveniste experiment to date have failed to produce positive results that could be independently replicated. In 1993, ''Nature'' published a paper describing a number of follow-up experiments that failed to find a similar effect,<ref name="followups">{{cite journal| journal = Nature| title = Human basophil degranulation is not triggered by very dilute antiserum against human IgE| volume = 366| issue = 5| date = 9 December 1993| author = Hirst S. J. |author2=Hayes N. A. |author3=Burridge J. |author4=Pearce FL |author5=Foreman JC. | pages = 525–527| pmid = 8255290 | doi = 10.1038/366525a0|bibcode = 1993Natur.366..525H | s2cid = 4314547}}</ref> and an independent study published in ''[[Experientia]]'' in 1992 showed no effect.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Ovelgönne|first1=J. H.|last2=Bol|first2=A. W. J. M.|last3=Hop|first3=W. C. J.|last4=van Wijk|first4=R.|title=Mechanical agitation of very dilute antiserum against IgE has no effect on basophil staining properties|journal=Experientia|date=1992|volume=48|issue=5|pages=504–508|doi=10.1007/BF01928175|pmid=1376282|s2cid=32110713}}</ref> An international team led by Madeleine Ennis of [[Queen's University of Belfast]] claimed in 1999 to have replicated the Benveniste results.<ref name="ennis">{{cite journal| journal = Inflammation Research| title = Inhibition of human basophil degranulation by successive histamine dilutions: Results of a European multi-centre trial| volume = 48| issue = Supplement 1| pages = 17–18|date=April 1999 | author= P. Belon |author2=J. Cumps |author3=M. Ennis |author4=P. F. Mannaioni |author5=J. Sainte-Laudy |author6=M. Roberfroid |author7=F. A. C. Wiegant | doi =10.1007/s000110050376| pmid=10350142| s2cid = 11803836}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal | title= Thanks for the memory. Experiments have backed what was once a scientific 'heresy', says Lionel Milgrom | author= Lionel Milgrom| journal= [[The Guardian]]| date= 2001-03-15| url = https://www.theguardian.com/science/2001/mar/15/technology2 | publisher= [[Guardian Unlimited]]
 }}</ref> Randi then forwarded the $1 million challenge to the [[BBC]] ''[[Horizon (BBC TV series)|Horizon]]'' program to prove the "water memory" theory following Ennis's experimental procedure. In response, experiments were conducted with the vice-president of the [[Royal Society]], John Enderby, overseeing the proceedings. The challenge ended with no memory effect observed by the Horizon team.<ref name="bbc">{{cite web | url = http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon/2002/homeopathytrans.shtml
 | title = Homeopathy: The test. Transcript. | publisher = [[BBC Two]] | date = 2003-11-26 | access-date = 2007-03-04}}</ref> For a piece on homeopathy, the ABC program [[20/20 (US television series)|20/20]] also attempted, unsuccessfully, to reproduce Ennis's results.<ref>{{cite news | last = Stossel | first = John | author-link=John Stossel|title = Homeopathic Remedies - Can Water Really Remember? | work = [[20/20 (US television series)|20/20]] | publisher = [[ABC News (United States)|ABC News]] | year = 2008 | url = https://abcnews.go.com/print?id=124309 | access-date = 2008-01-22}}</ref> Ennis has claimed that these tests did not follow her own experiment protocols.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Ennis |first1=Madeleine |title=E-mail from Professor Ennis on the specific differences in her study and the studies by ABC News (20/20) and the BBC |url=https://homeopathic.com/e-mail-from-professor-ennis-on-the-specific-differences-in-her-study-and-the-studies-by-abc-news-2020-and-the-bbc/ |access-date=4 December 2018 |work=homeopathic.com}}</ref>