3.6 KiB
| title | chunk | source | category | tags | date_saved | instance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DNA teleportation | 2/2 | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA_teleportation | reference | science, encyclopedia | 2026-05-05T09:18:52.216081+00:00 | kb-cron |
== Responses and criticisms == The 2009 publications were immediately followed by scientific comments and criticisms of the credibility of the purported phenomenon, as well as the authenticity of the research. According to chemist Jeff Reimers of the University of Sydney, Australia, "If the results are correct, these would be the most significant experiments performed in the past 90 years, demanding re-evaluation of the whole conceptual framework of modern chemistry." The credibility of the peer-review system of the journal Interdisciplinary Sciences: Computational Life Sciences, in which the 2009 papers were published, was questioned. It was a new journal of which Montagnier is chairman of the editorial board. Gary Schuster, at Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta, compared it to pathological science. Paul Myers at the University of Minnesota Morris also described it as "pathological science." He described the paper as "one of the more unprofessional write-ups I've ever run across" and criticized the publication process as having an "unbelievable" turnaround time: "another suspicious sign are the dates. This paper was submitted on 03 January 2009, revised on 05 January 2009, and accepted on 06 January 2009", leading him to ask: "Who reviewed this, the author's mother? Maybe someone even closer. Guess who the chairman of the editorial board is: Luc Montagnier... This is the same nonsense and the same apparatus that Benveniste was peddling." The influence of Benveniste can also be inferred from one of the co-authors, Jamal Aïssa, who was Benveniste's collaborator in the research in which they claim that water memory can be transported through the internet. (It was for this research that Benveniste received his second Ig Nobel Prize in 1998.) Philip Ball wrote an analysis about Montagnier's work in Chemistry World, stating "It looks like one of the most astonishing discoveries in a century, yet it was almost entirely ignored." He claims this experiment was never replicated and that the work was "ignored for good reason, namely that it's utterly implausible". On 28 June 2010, Montagnier spoke at the Lindau Nobel Laureate Meeting in Germany, "where 60 Nobel prize winners had gathered, along with 700 other scientists, to discuss the latest breakthroughs in medicine, chemistry and physics." He "presented a new method for detecting viral infections that bore close parallels to the basic tenets of homeopathy. Although fellow Nobel prize winners – who view homeopathy as quackery – were left openly shaking their heads, Montagnier's comments were rapidly embraced by homeopaths eager for greater credibility. Cristal Sumner, of the British Homeopathic Association, said Montagnier's work gave homeopathy 'a true scientific ethos'." Montagnier was also questioned about his beliefs on homeopathy, to which he replied: "I can't say that homeopathy is right in everything. What I can say now is that the high dilutions are right. High dilutions of something are not nothing. They are water structures which mimic the original molecules. We find that with DNA, we cannot work at the extremely high dilutions used in homeopathy; we cannot go further than a 10−18 dilution, or we lose the signal. But even at 10−18, you can calculate that there is not a single molecule of DNA left. And yet we detect a signal."
== See also == Homeopathy Pseudoscience Junk science Masaru Emoto Water Memory
== References ==