title: Presentiment or entanglement? An alternative explanation for apparent entanglement in provings.
abstract: A number of authors have recently discussed the possible role entanglement in homeopathy. Walach et al have published a homeopathic proving which they interpreted as demonstrating entanglement between placebo and verum groups in a proving. The lack of a 'run-in' period was a weakness of this trial. We present further results of our proving of Belladonna which show that subjects who reported symptoms during the placebo run-in period ('presentiment provers') were more likely to report symptoms during the treatment period. This data suggests and the observations of Walach et al may be explicable by conventional mechanisms including differential reporting and constitutional type.
authors.affiliation: University of Southampton, Southampton, Hants S017 1BJ, UK. jbb2@soton.ac.uk
authors.forename: G T
authors.initials: GT
authors.lastname: Lewith
authors.forename: Sarah
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Brien
authors.forename: Michael E
authors.initials: ME
authors.lastname: Hyland
mesh_terms: D001532:Atropa belladonna; D015982:Bias; D019317:Evidence-Based Medicine / Q000379:methods / Q000592:standards; D006705:Homeopathy / Q000379:methods / Q000592:standards; D006801:Humans; D015990:Placebo Effect; D016032:Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic / Q000592:standards; D012107:Research Design / Q000592:standards*; D016896:Treatment Outcome