Signature Over Substance: Homeopathy as a Diagnostic-Moderated Information Intervention

Signature Over Substance: Homeopathy as a Diagnostic-Moderated Information Intervention develops a testable information-medical framework for understanding and evaluating homeopathy. Instead of assuming that therapeutic effects must be substance-driven, the paper treats living organisms as organized informational systems. In this view, health corresponds to a stable, coherent reference regime, while disease is a persistent deviation from that regime. Therapy is defined as an informational input capable of reorganizing biological patterns toward recovery.

A central claim is that high potencies act as signature information rather than molecular pharmacology. Potentization is interpreted as a process that reduces material degrees of freedom while amplifying a structured informational signature. The framework remains mechanism-open: it does not presuppose a specific physical carrier for ultra-high potencies and stands or falls solely by empirical tests derived from its predictions.

As an empirical anchor, the paper evaluates the standardized Banerji protocols and their National Cancer Institute (NCI) Best-Case Series material. These data are treated explicitly as evidence level E0—signal-generating but not causally probative. Their role here is to justify transparent Bayesian evidential updating and to motivate prospective controlled studies, not to claim population-level efficacy.

The core contribution is a falsifiable moderator prediction that makes the controversy experimentally decidable: any specific add-on effect of diagnosis-congruent potencies beyond context effects must increase monotonically with diagnostic certainty. Therapeutic failure is therefore framed primarily as a consequence of incomplete or mis-targeted diagnosis, since symptoms may reflect secondary layers rather than the dominant disturbance pattern. To avoid undue abstraction, the manuscript specifies an exemplar deviation-proxy pipeline for concrete indications, including early-signature markers expected to shift before coarse clinical change becomes visible.

Placebo is integrated as genuine endogenous information regulation, not dismissed as noise. Placebo effects are interpreted as evidence that organisms can alter their informational state through expectation, meaning, relationship, and self-reorganization. This supports the informational thesis while sharpening the scientific task: separating context information from specific signature information. Accordingly, the paper proposes a three-arm discriminative design—(i) diagnosis-congruent protocol, (ii) placebo under identical context, and (iii) diagnosis-incongruent mismatch protocol. A stable superiority of the congruent arm with mismatch ≈ placebo supports a specific signature effect; convergence of all arms falsifies it.

The work is positioned as a research framework and study proposal, not a clinical guideline. Its ethical stance is system-neutral: all medical directions should be evaluated by the same standards of diagnostic precision, demonstrable efficacy, transparent handling of uncertainty, and protection from avoidable harm.

Overall, the manuscript is unique in unifying potencies, diagnostic fit, placebo dynamics, and Banerji signals within a single coherent informational model, and in providing a hard moderator prediction that can be confirmed or rejected through rigorous prospective testing.