December 13, 2024 • 33 mins
Can the words we speak and the intentions we hold truly shape our physical reality? Journey with means we explore this fascinating possibility. We'll revisit the controversial experiments of Masaru Emoto, who posited that words could influence the crystalline structure of water. Though often dismissed as pseudoscience, a new study by Feng et al. (2023), revitalizes this idea and examines if written words can influence biological systems. This research reveals that human embryonic kidney cells exposed to positive words show significant improvements in health markers. While this concept might echo Emoto's work, it opens a Pandora's box of questions about whether words act as energetic emitters affecting cellular structures. The possibility of language influencing biology through information fields or biofields may sound speculative, but it offers compelling directions for future research and leads us to consider the impact of positive self-talk on personal growth & health. The resonant effects of affirmations and the physiological responses they evoke may not be as "out there" as we once thought.
takeaways
- A new study suggests a link between words and cellular function.
- The implications of this research challenge traditional views
- Our thoughts and intentions may influence our physical health.
- This resurrects Masaru Emoto's water experiments
- The scientific community largely viewed Emoto's work as pseudoscience.
- Gerald Pollock's research introduces the concept of structured water.
- Structured water behaves differently around biological substances.
- Water can have a memory for substances it interacts with.
- While we don't know is these effects are real and what is causing them, it would fundamentally alter our understanding if this proved to be reproducible
Chapters
00:00
Introduction to the Power of Thoughts
04:45
Gerald Pollock's Research on Water Structure
6:50
The Structure of Biological Water
10:00
How Water May Carry Information
12:19
The Feng et al. Study
20:30
Exploring Mechanisms: How Words Might Influence Biology
27:40
The Power of Positive Words and Self-Talk
Looking for a Next Level Human Coach? Get on the waitlist and get access to the brand-new science of quantum metabolism and identity restructuring with Dr Jade and the team.
http://nextlevelhuman.com/human-coaching
Connect with Next Level Human
Website: www.nextlevelhuman.com
support@nextlevelhuman.com
Connect with Dr. Jade Teta
Website: www.jadeteta.com
Instagram: @jadeteta
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
Okay, everybody, welcome to today's show.
I am happy you're here.
My name is Dr Jade Tita.
I am the host of the Next LevelHuman podcast and today we're
going to be talking about areally very interesting new
study that came out and theramifications of a study like
this, if that is, if somethinglike this is true and can be
(00:24):
duplicated.
And this goes into the ideathat has been floating around in
the self-development space forsome time, and that is the idea
that our thoughts and ouremotions in this case mainly our
thoughts and the intentionbehind those thoughts words in
particular can they influence insome way our body and ourselves
(00:50):
.
And a lot of this researchreally came out of, or the
interest in this.
We won't call it research, butit really became popularized by
Masaru Emoto's work.
I don't know if I'm pronouncinghis first name correctly, but a
lot of people know the Emoto'swork.
I don't know if I'm pronouncinghis first name correctly, but a
lot of people know the Emotowater experiments.
And this is where, essentially,dr Emoto took words and wrote
(01:14):
them on beakers full of waterthings like negative words and
other words that were morepositive words and then took
that water, froze that water andlooked at the crystals that
were formed and there's a wholebook on his work where he did
(01:35):
this and what you would see isthat negative words created
these ugly sort ofcrystallizations or frozen
elements of the water.
So, as you can imagine, whenyou freeze water you'll have
like snowflakes right, thesecrystalline structures that form
in the water almost like asnowflake, and certain positive
(01:58):
words would create thesebeautiful images, these
beautiful quote frozen elementsof water, these beautiful
snowflakes and ugly words ornasty words or negative words
would create these othercompounds, these frozen elements
of water that would create acrystalline structure that was
(02:21):
not very attractive, and soEmoto suggested words like love
or gratitude when written oncontainers of water, altered the
water's molecular structure ina way and created these
beautiful crystalline patternswhen the water was frozen.
Now this is something that thelay individual can get very
(02:44):
excited about, but at least inmy world, where you're looking
for evidence and science, thisis considered garbage science,
pseudoscience, something thathas never been replicated and
has a lot of negative publicityaround, at least in the
scientific space publicityaround, at least in the
(03:07):
scientific space and it's alwaysbeen something that I've looked
at as very dubious, notsomething I've ever really taken
seriously.
But I have gotten moreinterested in this as I've
looked into the work of moreGerald Pollack and some of his
theoretical considerations.
Gerald Pollack is a researcherout of, I believe, the
University of Washington, uw,and he has been doing work on
(03:31):
water for quite some time, isvery well published in this area
and has suggested a fourthphase of water, and so let me go
through that first because itmay have some ramifications in
this discussion.
And so, as Gerald Pollack'swork came out and started to
become a little bit morewell-known, there are mechanisms
(03:53):
by which he has described ortheorized about, hypothesized
about, that could potentiallydetermine how water could have
quote memory, memory forsubstances or memory for
different things that it'sinteracting with.
And so let me go through thatresearch with you really quickly
(04:15):
.
So this work is the idea thatbiological water, so-called
structured water, or EZ water asGerald Pollack refers to it,
which is known as EZ forexclusion zone water that this
water is different than waterthat you would find in its
(04:36):
liquid state, free flowingthrough a river or sitting in a
beaker.
It's different than water vaporyou might find in the cloud and
it's different than solid waterthat you might find in ice,
that it's a fourth phase ofwater.
It's not solid, it's not liquid, it's not gas, it's more this
viscous type of water that iskind of a go between between
(05:02):
solid ice and liquid water, andit has to do with the way the
H2O molecules stack up.
So most of us, if we rememberour biological chemistry and
biochemistry or I guess thiswould be biological sciences
that we took in high school thiswould be covered.
(05:22):
H2o is considered to look likean oxygen molecule with two
hydrogens attached to it, almostlike a Mickey Mouse, right?
So you see this big oxygen inthe middle and these two
hydrogens sticking off the sides, and when we look at it in our
textbooks it looks kind of likea Mickey Mouse, you know, a face
(05:42):
with two ears.
And this was H2O.
And the idea would be that H2O,this water molecule, just
simply interacts with other H2Omolecules in like a sheet of
water.
And what we really know is thatit's not necessarily a sheet of
water per se, that these watermolecules are changing
(06:04):
configurations all the time,sharing electrons, protons and
sort of floating around in thisway.
And what Gerald Pollack's workshows is that when this water
gets around, biologicalsubstances like cell membranes,
cell proteins and things likethat in plants and in animals
and of course in us humans, itstarts to behave differently and
(06:28):
begins to stack in a differentway.
So it no longer looks like H2O.
But the idea is that this wateris more like H3O2 type of
structure and so this structurelooks differently and it's
hypothesized to look more like acrystalline lattice and a
(06:51):
stacking mechanism that thewater sort of stacks on top of
each other.
And what has been showed inGerald Pollack's work is that
it's called exclusion zone water, because when this water begins
to stack in this crystallinestructure, what it does is it
forms a more negative type ofpolarity, pushing all the
(07:13):
positive solutes, things likesalts and stuff like that out.
And so the water next to thebiological layer, next to the
protein or next to the membranemembrane, looks differently than
what you'd see in bulk water.
It is no longer H2O, it looksmore like H3O2.
(07:33):
Now, of course this is prettycontroversial.
If you follow this research,not a lot of scientists agree
with this and it certainly hasnot yet been visualized this way
.
But what we do know is thatbiological water is acting
differently when it starts tointeract with membranes, let's
(07:56):
say in the mitochondria incellular membranes and around
proteins, and this is where thisresearch becomes interesting
for this discussion.
Now let me just briefly tellyou and see if you can follow
this, and I'll do my best.
Now imagine that this water isup against a particular cellular
(08:18):
membrane.
And because cellular membranesare not smooth surfaces like the
beaker of a glass container, ifthe water was sitting in a
stainless steel cup or watercontainer or a glass beaker Cell
membranes have all kinds ofdifferent proteins and other
things sticking off of them, andso at the molecular level
(08:41):
they're kind of bumpy, and whathappens is water on top of that
layer stacks up, and you canalmost think about it as this
layer of water that begins tostack up in a particular
orientation based on themolecular structure of the
proteins coming off thosemembranes, which will look
(09:02):
different.
You can kind of almost think ofit like a key, and so all of a
sudden or maybe a better examplemight be like a barcode, and so
now the water begins to stackup in a particular way and takes
on a particular shapecorresponding to the cell
membrane that it's interactingwith, and this is one of the
(09:25):
ways that Gerald Pollack andother people are proposing that
water can transfer energy andhave memory.
Electromagnetic fields andenergetic signatures can also
change the way this waterstructures or binds together, so
(09:54):
that it can subtly change theway these H2O molecules are
interacting.
Now, again, this is highlycontroversial stuff.
We do not know if this is true,but I'm just giving you this
background to perhaps understandwhat might be going on when you
hear about this study that I'mgetting ready to tell you about.
(10:15):
Okay, so now we've got thiscontroversial study by Emoto
putting words on water and thenseeing that the crystalline
structures, when that waterfreezes, can be either more
beautiful and nice, withpositive words, or more ugly and
not as ordered, with negativewords.
And we have some of this workby Gerald Pollack showing that
(10:36):
water is behaves differently inbiological structures when water
is around cells, and we don'texactly know how it's doing what
it's doing, but we do know thatit's doing something different.
We just don't agree on exactlyhow this is working.
Now I want to bring you to thestudy that I want you to be
(10:58):
aware of, and so this particularstudy is by Feng et al, in 2023
.
And the title of the study isInformation Fields of Written
Texts Protect Cells fromOxidative Damage and Accelerate
Repair.
And so, right away, you mightbe thinking to yourself okay,
(11:19):
this sounds kind of weird.
Right away, you might bethinking to yourself OK, this
sounds kind of weird.
Basically, are you telling methat written words can influence
cells?
Well, this sounds a lot likethe work that Emoto was doing,
and so let me tell you aboutthis particular study.
So what these researchers did isthey took cell cultures of
(11:41):
human embryonic kidney cells, aparticular strain of kidney
cells, and this was in a Petridish, and they subjected these
kidney cells to hydrogenperoxide.
So hydrogen peroxide is knownto be a chemical agent that
(12:01):
produces reactive oxygen speciesand can damage cells.
So what they did is they tookthese kidney cells in a Petri
dish and they exposed them tohydrogen peroxide, which is
known to be associated withaging, inflammation and disease
processes in cells.
Then what they did was theyintroduced written words and
texts to these cells.
(12:22):
So they had positive words likelove and gratitude, as well as
single phrases like the wordBuddha, and these written words
were printed, sealed in anopaque envelope so that it
prevented any visual orpsychological bias, and then
placed beneath the Petri dishescontaining the stressed cells.
(12:43):
So, step one they stressed outthe cells.
Step two they put written wordsin opaque envelopes and then
put the Petri dishes on top ofthose envelopes.
Now there was also a controlgroup where the cells were
exposed to neutral words orempty envelopes.
Now there was also a controlgroup where the cells were
exposed to neutral words orempty envelopes, and this was
(13:06):
served as the control group.
And so these controls reallywere there to rule out any
observed effects that were dueto just the presence of the
envelope or any unintendedenvironmental variables.
It's just the way that you dosomething, and the other thing
about this study is that it wasa double-blind design, so
neither the researchers handlingthe cells or those analyzing
(13:29):
the results knew which group thecells belonged to, so they
didn't know if the cells got aword or if the cells had just a
neutral word or a positive wordor had no words at all.
Now here were the key findingsthe cellular structures, the
Petri dishes with the cells thatwere exposed to the envelopes
(13:53):
that had positive phrases likelove and gratitude written on
them, demonstrated a 21%increase in ATP levels, which
indicated an enhancedmitochondrial function in those
cells.
Those cells also had a 29%reduction in reactive oxygen
species, which was a marker ofcellular stress and cellular
(14:18):
damage, and a 19% improvement inthe cell growth rate.
So they had better recovery.
This was the cells that hadpositive words, like love and
gratitude, that they wereexposed to in those envelopes.
Now the cells that were exposedto the word Buddha had an even
better, a slightly betterresponse in ATP levels.
(14:40):
Better, a slightly betterresponse in ATP levels, a 22%
boost, but basically the same asthe 21% boost in the positive
cells.
And then the control groupsthose cells that were exposed to
neutral words or no words atall had showed no significant
changes in ATP, reactive oxygenspecies or cell growth,
(15:04):
confirming that the effects werespecific to the positive words
and text.
Now, why does this get someonelike me more excited?
Now, of course, we have to lookat results like this and we
have to remain skeptical.
This could be any number ofthings.
We don't know that this is true.
(15:24):
I'm not saying this isnecessarily true.
What I'm saying is we have thiswork from Emoto that we never
could really duplicate and itwas done in a way that no
scientific journal wouldprobably accept that for true
publication because it wasn'twell controlled.
And now we have anotherresearcher who has controlled
(15:48):
the experiment in a way withlive cells, not just water, and
seen an effect here and saw apretty substantial effect.
We're talking 21% increase, 29%reduction in damage, 20%
increase in cell growth ratejust from these cells being
(16:08):
exposed to words.
This is absolutely bizarre whenyou think about it, but it does
bring back up this idea of theEmoto experiments.
Now, how might this work?
Now we're entering intouncharted territory because
first of all we say, well, didthis work?
(16:28):
Does this work?
Can really words and intentionbehind words, or the intention
that a word conveys, impactbiological systems?
And if so, how is thishappening?
Based on this study I justpresented to you, it seems to
suggest that this study says yes, they do impact biological
(16:49):
systems.
So if they do, and if that isactually a thing, how might that
be happening?
So I'm going to give you acouple of theoretical
considerations here that theseresearchers were considering
that might be going on here, andalso throw in some of my own
conjecture here.
So let's first talk about theidea of information fields and
(17:13):
the idea that words could bealmost like energetic emitters,
and so this is the idea thatinformation fields are involved
somehow here, that there is somekind of subtle energy field
that is influencing biologicalsystems.
Some people who study this workand who theorize on this stuff
that these electromagnetic wavescarry meaning rather than just
(17:47):
energy.
So these fields might interactwith cellular structures,
particularly the mitochondria,which are highly sensitive to
environmental signals.
This might be one way that thiswould work, and this is similar
to concepts that underpin thestudy of biofields in
alternative medicine.
The biofield is an energeticelectromagnetic field that
(18:09):
essentially is surrounding thebody and is thought to play a
role in cellular communicationand healing.
So is it.
Could it be the case that wordssomehow, when you put specific
arrangements of letters togetherand the meaning that is
inherent in that specificarrangement of letters is
(18:29):
somehow creating some kind ofvibrational imprint, that is,
then the cellular water ispicking up?
Obviously?
Emoto did this by puttingnegative and positive words on
beakers of glass and thenfreezing that water that was in
that beaker and seeing changes.
Now what we're seeing is thesame thing here, where cells are
(18:51):
being exposed to, I guess, thisintention.
How might this work, if it isworking at all?
This might be one way to thinkabout this working at all.
This might be one way to thinkabout this.
Now, another way might besomething that we might call
quantum resonance or vibrationalcommunication.
Quantum biology suggests thatbiological systems operate on
(19:14):
principles of resonance, wherevibrating particles communicate
by sharing energy andinformation.
One of the ways that we nowknow this is that our sense of
smell has now been proven to notnecessarily work in a
biological way, where it's alock and key phenomena, where a
molecule looks a particular wayand binds to a particular
(19:34):
receptor that is complementaryin shape and form, but that also
what happens is that it'spicking up the vibration, the
vibrational movement of thesemolecules, and that is what's
changing the scent.
And this research was done bytaking simple molecules and
putting deuterium, a heavierform of hydrogen, into the
(19:59):
molecules, which didn't changethe shape of the molecules but
changed the heaviness of themolecules and would change the
way the molecules vibrate andshow that those molecules smell
different to participants.
And this has opened up the doorthat there are quantum effects
that are happening in biologicalsystems and might be what is
(20:19):
going on when we smell things.
So is it possible that there'ssome kind of resonant effect
when two systems vibrate at thesame frequency that amplifies
their energy.
So is it possible, for example,that a positive word or
intention is vibrating in aparticular way that the cellular
(20:40):
structures are picking up on insome way and having an effect.
For example, a metaphor mightbe the example of cymatics.
Cymatics, if you've ever seenthis, is when you take a sound
plate, let's say, and you poursand all over that sound plate
and then you send a tone offrequency into the sound plate,
(21:04):
like, let's say, 8 hertz or 528hertz tone of music, and what
happens is that sand will forminto a shape, a unique shape
specific to that sound and thatfrequency of that sound.
Could it be the case that wordsand the intent behind words are
(21:27):
working similar to this soundand cymatic forces and then
causing the cells and thecellular structures to behave in
particular ways?
We definitely know thatbiological systems like
mitochondria are known tomaintain some of this quantum
coherence.
They are picking up and therehas been research showing that.
(21:48):
I'll cover in future episodes,research showing that
mitochondria respond to soundand respond to frequency and can
increase energy production as aresult of that.
They also respond to light.
And could it be that they'realso responding to intent behind
words?
So again, all of this isincredibly speculative, but it's
(22:11):
just to sort of throw out ideasabout what might be happening
and, of course, sort of thefinal mechanism here which could
be an and or situation.
Maybe we've got theseelectrical fields, maybe we've
got some of this quantumresonance, but maybe the
structured water, thisbiological water, is partly
(22:31):
playing a role in thisconfirmation.
For example, if we take Emoto'swork and we put a positive word
on a beaker of water and thenfreeze it and see that it has
conformational changes, could itwork that the water in our
cells is picking up on thatenergy?
In the same way, someone likeDr Emoto suggested Again highly
(22:54):
controversial we have to be verycareful to even say that this
particular study is real andthis is a real effect, but based
on this study.
Obviously I am intrigued enoughby this particular study, this
new study, to revisit this ideaof intent behind words, and so,
(23:16):
again, we have to be incrediblyspeculative.
We cannot say this is proven,it's highly controversial, but
it is intriguing for sure.
Now, if this is the case, let'sjust play a game for a minute
and say, okay, let's say it isthe case and we actually believe
, you might believe, that wordsand intention behind words can
(23:40):
have positive effects onbiological systems.
And, by the way, let's justtake a step back here and just
think about this for a minute.
If I tell you you are sobeautiful, you are so courageous
, you are so strong, I'm soproud of you.
Now, you know, when I say thatto you right Some of you, I bet,
(24:02):
just listening to this when youhear those words, you feel good
.
You feel good.
There's a resonance that comesover you, right, almost like
this ah, thank you, jade, thatfeels really good.
So we know that words can makeus feel good.
Now, do we really think thatthat biology, that feeling that
(24:23):
we're having, is simply a resultof what's going on in our brain
?
Or could we potentially seethat that could create, almost
like a cymatic effect, aresonant effect that goes out
through our whole body and makesus feel good and influences the
cells?
And if we do believe that, whatdo we think might be
contributing to that thing?
When I say, oh my gosh, you'reso beautiful, when you feel that
(24:47):
, what might we think is thething that is transmitting that
energy into ourselves?
Well, it could be thebiological water.
And so, certainly, when I tellyou you're so beautiful, you can
feel that, especially whensomeone you love tells you that
right.
There's even been really coolresearch that shows that when
you tell your dog I love you,that the dog actually has
(25:09):
reduced cortisol and differenteffects.
Well, how does that impact ourhormonal system if it's not
impacting our cells?
And so is it really that far ofa jump to suggest that the word
, seeing a word on the page, isgoing to have that effect?
And then now here's the reallybig jump that cells can somehow
pick up the energy of this whenthey can't even see the word,
(25:34):
that words, just just by beingput down on paper, have a
particular energy to it, and soI know this is controversial and
incredibly interesting, and whoknows if this is the case, but
this particular study, I think,is a really, really important
one to begin looking at.
If we're going to really startto be serious about some of
(25:58):
these things that we hear aboutin self-development, we need to
have some evidence around them,and this particular study seems
to suggest that there are somereally interesting things going
on here, right?
Some really interesting thingsgoing on.
So this particular study, fengQ et al.
Information Fields of WrittenText Protect Cells from Oxidated
(26:21):
Damage and Accelerate Repair.
This was published in thejournal Explore in 2023.
Some of the other research ifyou want to get into this, if
you're interested in the Emotowork and you haven't seen that,
that was published in 2004.
He wrote a book called Healingwith Water and he has published
(26:45):
in the Journal of AlternativeComplementary Medicine back in
2004.
And then Gerald Pollack's workis the Fourth Phase of Water.
This was published back in 2013.
The Fourth Phase of Water thiswas published back in 2013.
So what do we do with thisinformation?
Well, it's just usefulinformation, I think,
interesting information, andcertainly in the work that I do
(27:06):
in my coaching, we look at theidea of self-talk.
We look at the idea of howself-talk can impact us and our
emotional states.
We look at how our emotionalstates have stories associated
with them and how our emotionalstates can create stories in and
of themselves and how thesestories are influencing our
(27:27):
identity.
And now we have certain ways oflooking at words very
differently and seeing them notjust impacting us in this way,
but perhaps having directinfluence over our emotional
state.
So for those of you who areinterested in things like
neuro-linguistic programming,the value of self-talk and all
(27:48):
of these kinds of things, thisshould give you some pause and
food for thought, and so I'mgoing to end here today.
Some pause and food for thought, and so I'm going to end here
today.
I hope you enjoyed this episode, as always.
If you liked what you heardtoday and you want to continue
(28:09):
supporting the Next Level Humanpodcast, the best way to do that
is go over to iTunes or yourfavorite podcasting application.
Give us a review.
I love getting reviews from allof you.
It really helps spread the newsof the show.
Appreciate you very much fordoing that and I will see you at
the next episode.
Okay, everybody, welcome to today's show.
I am happy you're here.
My name is Dr Jade Tita.
I am the host of the Next LevelHuman podcast and today we're
going to be talking about areally very interesting new
study that came out and theramifications of a study like
this, if that is, if somethinglike this is true and can be
(00:24):
duplicated.
And this goes into the ideathat has been floating around in
the self-development space forsome time, and that is the idea
that our thoughts and ouremotions in this case mainly our
thoughts and the intentionbehind those thoughts words in
particular can they influence insome way our body and ourselves
(00:50):
.
And a lot of this researchreally came out of, or the
interest in this.
We won't call it research, butit really became popularized by
Masaru Emoto's work.
I don't know if I'm pronouncinghis first name correctly, but a
lot of people know the Emoto'swork.
I don't know if I'm pronouncinghis first name correctly, but a
lot of people know the Emotowater experiments.
And this is where, essentially,dr Emoto took words and wrote
(01:14):
them on beakers full of waterthings like negative words and
other words that were morepositive words and then took
that water, froze that water andlooked at the crystals that
were formed and there's a wholebook on his work where he did
(01:35):
this and what you would see isthat negative words created
these ugly sort ofcrystallizations or frozen
elements of the water.
So, as you can imagine, whenyou freeze water you'll have
like snowflakes right, thesecrystalline structures that form
in the water almost like asnowflake, and certain positive
(01:58):
words would create thesebeautiful images, these
beautiful quote frozen elementsof water, these beautiful
snowflakes and ugly words ornasty words or negative words
would create these othercompounds, these frozen elements
of water that would create acrystalline structure that was
(02:21):
not very attractive, and soEmoto suggested words like love
or gratitude when written oncontainers of water, altered the
water's molecular structure ina way and created these
beautiful crystalline patternswhen the water was frozen.
Now this is something that thelay individual can get very
(02:44):
excited about, but at least inmy world, where you're looking
for evidence and science, thisis considered garbage science,
pseudoscience, something thathas never been replicated and
has a lot of negative publicityaround, at least in the
scientific space publicityaround, at least in the
(03:07):
scientific space and it's alwaysbeen something that I've looked
at as very dubious, notsomething I've ever really taken
seriously.
But I have gotten moreinterested in this as I've
looked into the work of moreGerald Pollack and some of his
theoretical considerations.
Gerald Pollack is a researcherout of, I believe, the
University of Washington, uw,and he has been doing work on
(03:31):
water for quite some time, isvery well published in this area
and has suggested a fourthphase of water, and so let me go
through that first because itmay have some ramifications in
this discussion.
And so, as Gerald Pollack'swork came out and started to
become a little bit morewell-known, there are mechanisms
(03:53):
by which he has described ortheorized about, hypothesized
about, that could potentiallydetermine how water could have
quote memory, memory forsubstances or memory for
different things that it'sinteracting with.
And so let me go through thatresearch with you really quickly
(04:15):
.
So this work is the idea thatbiological water, so-called
structured water, or EZ water asGerald Pollack refers to it,
which is known as EZ forexclusion zone water that this
water is different than waterthat you would find in its
(04:36):
liquid state, free flowingthrough a river or sitting in a
beaker.
It's different than water vaporyou might find in the cloud and
it's different than solid waterthat you might find in ice,
that it's a fourth phase ofwater.
It's not solid, it's not liquid, it's not gas, it's more this
viscous type of water that iskind of a go between between
(05:02):
solid ice and liquid water, andit has to do with the way the
H2O molecules stack up.
So most of us, if we rememberour biological chemistry and
biochemistry or I guess thiswould be biological sciences
that we took in high school thiswould be covered.
(05:22):
H2o is considered to look likean oxygen molecule with two
hydrogens attached to it, almostlike a Mickey Mouse, right?
So you see this big oxygen inthe middle and these two
hydrogens sticking off the sides, and when we look at it in our
textbooks it looks kind of likea Mickey Mouse, you know, a face
(05:42):
with two ears.
And this was H2O.
And the idea would be that H2O,this water molecule, just
simply interacts with other H2Omolecules in like a sheet of
water.
And what we really know is thatit's not necessarily a sheet of
water per se, that these watermolecules are changing
(06:04):
configurations all the time,sharing electrons, protons and
sort of floating around in thisway.
And what Gerald Pollack's workshows is that when this water
gets around, biologicalsubstances like cell membranes,
cell proteins and things likethat in plants and in animals
and of course in us humans, itstarts to behave differently and
(06:28):
begins to stack in a differentway.
So it no longer looks like H2O.
But the idea is that this wateris more like H3O2 type of
structure and so this structurelooks differently and it's
hypothesized to look more like acrystalline lattice and a
(06:51):
stacking mechanism that thewater sort of stacks on top of
each other.
And what has been showed inGerald Pollack's work is that
it's called exclusion zone water, because when this water begins
to stack in this crystallinestructure, what it does is it
forms a more negative type ofpolarity, pushing all the
(07:13):
positive solutes, things likesalts and stuff like that out.
And so the water next to thebiological layer, next to the
protein or next to the membranemembrane, looks differently than
what you'd see in bulk water.
It is no longer H2O, it looksmore like H3O2.
(07:33):
Now, of course this is prettycontroversial.
If you follow this research,not a lot of scientists agree
with this and it certainly hasnot yet been visualized this way
.
But what we do know is thatbiological water is acting
differently when it starts tointeract with membranes, let's
(07:56):
say in the mitochondria incellular membranes and around
proteins, and this is where thisresearch becomes interesting
for this discussion.
Now let me just briefly tellyou and see if you can follow
this, and I'll do my best.
Now imagine that this water isup against a particular cellular
(08:18):
membrane.
And because cellular membranesare not smooth surfaces like the
beaker of a glass container, ifthe water was sitting in a
stainless steel cup or watercontainer or a glass beaker Cell
membranes have all kinds ofdifferent proteins and other
things sticking off of them, andso at the molecular level
(08:41):
they're kind of bumpy, and whathappens is water on top of that
layer stacks up, and you canalmost think about it as this
layer of water that begins tostack up in a particular
orientation based on themolecular structure of the
proteins coming off thosemembranes, which will look
(09:02):
different.
You can kind of almost think ofit like a key, and so all of a
sudden or maybe a better examplemight be like a barcode, and so
now the water begins to stackup in a particular way and takes
on a particular shapecorresponding to the cell
membrane that it's interactingwith, and this is one of the
(09:25):
ways that Gerald Pollack andother people are proposing that
water can transfer energy andhave memory.
Electromagnetic fields andenergetic signatures can also
change the way this waterstructures or binds together, so
(09:54):
that it can subtly change theway these H2O molecules are
interacting.
Now, again, this is highlycontroversial stuff.
We do not know if this is true,but I'm just giving you this
background to perhaps understandwhat might be going on when you
hear about this study that I'mgetting ready to tell you about.
(10:15):
Okay, so now we've got thiscontroversial study by Emoto
putting words on water and thenseeing that the crystalline
structures, when that waterfreezes, can be either more
beautiful and nice, withpositive words, or more ugly and
not as ordered, with negativewords.
And we have some of this workby Gerald Pollack showing that
(10:36):
water is behaves differently inbiological structures when water
is around cells, and we don'texactly know how it's doing what
it's doing, but we do know thatit's doing something different.
We just don't agree on exactlyhow this is working.
Now I want to bring you to thestudy that I want you to be
(10:58):
aware of, and so this particularstudy is by Feng et al, in 2023
.
And the title of the study isInformation Fields of Written
Texts Protect Cells fromOxidative Damage and Accelerate
Repair.
And so, right away, you mightbe thinking to yourself okay,
(11:19):
this sounds kind of weird.
Right away, you might bethinking to yourself OK, this
sounds kind of weird.
Basically, are you telling methat written words can influence
cells?
Well, this sounds a lot likethe work that Emoto was doing,
and so let me tell you aboutthis particular study.
So what these researchers did isthey took cell cultures of
(11:41):
human embryonic kidney cells, aparticular strain of kidney
cells, and this was in a Petridish, and they subjected these
kidney cells to hydrogenperoxide.
So hydrogen peroxide is knownto be a chemical agent that
(12:01):
produces reactive oxygen speciesand can damage cells.
So what they did is they tookthese kidney cells in a Petri
dish and they exposed them tohydrogen peroxide, which is
known to be associated withaging, inflammation and disease
processes in cells.
Then what they did was theyintroduced written words and
texts to these cells.
(12:22):
So they had positive words likelove and gratitude, as well as
single phrases like the wordBuddha, and these written words
were printed, sealed in anopaque envelope so that it
prevented any visual orpsychological bias, and then
placed beneath the Petri dishescontaining the stressed cells.
(12:43):
So, step one they stressed outthe cells.
Step two they put written wordsin opaque envelopes and then
put the Petri dishes on top ofthose envelopes.
Now there was also a controlgroup where the cells were
exposed to neutral words orempty envelopes.
Now there was also a controlgroup where the cells were
exposed to neutral words orempty envelopes, and this was
(13:06):
served as the control group.
And so these controls reallywere there to rule out any
observed effects that were dueto just the presence of the
envelope or any unintendedenvironmental variables.
It's just the way that you dosomething, and the other thing
about this study is that it wasa double-blind design, so
neither the researchers handlingthe cells or those analyzing
(13:29):
the results knew which group thecells belonged to, so they
didn't know if the cells got aword or if the cells had just a
neutral word or a positive wordor had no words at all.
Now here were the key findingsthe cellular structures, the
Petri dishes with the cells thatwere exposed to the envelopes
(13:53):
that had positive phrases likelove and gratitude written on
them, demonstrated a 21%increase in ATP levels, which
indicated an enhancedmitochondrial function in those
cells.
Those cells also had a 29%reduction in reactive oxygen
species, which was a marker ofcellular stress and cellular
(14:18):
damage, and a 19% improvement inthe cell growth rate.
So they had better recovery.
This was the cells that hadpositive words, like love and
gratitude, that they wereexposed to in those envelopes.
Now the cells that were exposedto the word Buddha had an even
better, a slightly betterresponse in ATP levels.
(14:40):
Better, a slightly betterresponse in ATP levels, a 22%
boost, but basically the same asthe 21% boost in the positive
cells.
And then the control groupsthose cells that were exposed to
neutral words or no words atall had showed no significant
changes in ATP, reactive oxygenspecies or cell growth,
(15:04):
confirming that the effects werespecific to the positive words
and text.
Now, why does this get someonelike me more excited?
Now, of course, we have to lookat results like this and we
have to remain skeptical.
This could be any number ofthings.
We don't know that this is true.
(15:24):
I'm not saying this isnecessarily true.
What I'm saying is we have thiswork from Emoto that we never
could really duplicate and itwas done in a way that no
scientific journal wouldprobably accept that for true
publication because it wasn'twell controlled.
And now we have anotherresearcher who has controlled
(15:48):
the experiment in a way withlive cells, not just water, and
seen an effect here and saw apretty substantial effect.
We're talking 21% increase, 29%reduction in damage, 20%
increase in cell growth ratejust from these cells being
(16:08):
exposed to words.
This is absolutely bizarre whenyou think about it, but it does
bring back up this idea of theEmoto experiments.
Now, how might this work?
Now we're entering intouncharted territory because
first of all we say, well, didthis work?
(16:28):
Does this work?
Can really words and intentionbehind words, or the intention
that a word conveys, impactbiological systems?
And if so, how is thishappening?
Based on this study I justpresented to you, it seems to
suggest that this study says yes, they do impact biological
(16:49):
systems.
So if they do, and if that isactually a thing, how might that
be happening?
So I'm going to give you acouple of theoretical
considerations here that theseresearchers were considering
that might be going on here, andalso throw in some of my own
conjecture here.
So let's first talk about theidea of information fields and
(17:13):
the idea that words could bealmost like energetic emitters,
and so this is the idea thatinformation fields are involved
somehow here, that there is somekind of subtle energy field
that is influencing biologicalsystems.
Some people who study this workand who theorize on this stuff
that these electromagnetic wavescarry meaning rather than just
(17:47):
energy.
So these fields might interactwith cellular structures,
particularly the mitochondria,which are highly sensitive to
environmental signals.
This might be one way that thiswould work, and this is similar
to concepts that underpin thestudy of biofields in
alternative medicine.
The biofield is an energeticelectromagnetic field that
(18:09):
essentially is surrounding thebody and is thought to play a
role in cellular communicationand healing.
So is it.
Could it be the case that wordssomehow, when you put specific
arrangements of letters togetherand the meaning that is
inherent in that specificarrangement of letters is
(18:29):
somehow creating some kind ofvibrational imprint, that is,
then the cellular water ispicking up?
Obviously?
Emoto did this by puttingnegative and positive words on
beakers of glass and thenfreezing that water that was in
that beaker and seeing changes.
Now what we're seeing is thesame thing here, where cells are
(18:51):
being exposed to, I guess, thisintention.
How might this work, if it isworking at all?
This might be one way to thinkabout this working at all.
This might be one way to thinkabout this.
Now, another way might besomething that we might call
quantum resonance or vibrationalcommunication.
Quantum biology suggests thatbiological systems operate on
(19:14):
principles of resonance, wherevibrating particles communicate
by sharing energy andinformation.
One of the ways that we nowknow this is that our sense of
smell has now been proven to notnecessarily work in a
biological way, where it's alock and key phenomena, where a
molecule looks a particular wayand binds to a particular
(19:34):
receptor that is complementaryin shape and form, but that also
what happens is that it'spicking up the vibration, the
vibrational movement of thesemolecules, and that is what's
changing the scent.
And this research was done bytaking simple molecules and
putting deuterium, a heavierform of hydrogen, into the
(19:59):
molecules, which didn't changethe shape of the molecules but
changed the heaviness of themolecules and would change the
way the molecules vibrate andshow that those molecules smell
different to participants.
And this has opened up the doorthat there are quantum effects
that are happening in biologicalsystems and might be what is
(20:19):
going on when we smell things.
So is it possible that there'ssome kind of resonant effect
when two systems vibrate at thesame frequency that amplifies
their energy.
So is it possible, for example,that a positive word or
intention is vibrating in aparticular way that the cellular
(20:40):
structures are picking up on insome way and having an effect.
For example, a metaphor mightbe the example of cymatics.
Cymatics, if you've ever seenthis, is when you take a sound
plate, let's say, and you poursand all over that sound plate
and then you send a tone offrequency into the sound plate,
(21:04):
like, let's say, 8 hertz or 528hertz tone of music, and what
happens is that sand will forminto a shape, a unique shape
specific to that sound and thatfrequency of that sound.
Could it be the case that wordsand the intent behind words are
(21:27):
working similar to this soundand cymatic forces and then
causing the cells and thecellular structures to behave in
particular ways?
We definitely know thatbiological systems like
mitochondria are known tomaintain some of this quantum
coherence.
They are picking up and therehas been research showing that.
(21:48):
I'll cover in future episodes,research showing that
mitochondria respond to soundand respond to frequency and can
increase energy production as aresult of that.
They also respond to light.
And could it be that they'realso responding to intent behind
words?
So again, all of this isincredibly speculative, but it's
(22:11):
just to sort of throw out ideasabout what might be happening
and, of course, sort of thefinal mechanism here which could
be an and or situation.
Maybe we've got theseelectrical fields, maybe we've
got some of this quantumresonance, but maybe the
structured water, thisbiological water, is partly
(22:31):
playing a role in thisconfirmation.
For example, if we take Emoto'swork and we put a positive word
on a beaker of water and thenfreeze it and see that it has
conformational changes, could itwork that the water in our
cells is picking up on thatenergy?
In the same way, someone likeDr Emoto suggested Again highly
(22:54):
controversial we have to be verycareful to even say that this
particular study is real andthis is a real effect, but based
on this study.
Obviously I am intrigued enoughby this particular study, this
new study, to revisit this ideaof intent behind words, and so,
(23:16):
again, we have to be incrediblyspeculative.
We cannot say this is proven,it's highly controversial, but
it is intriguing for sure.
Now, if this is the case, let'sjust play a game for a minute
and say, okay, let's say it isthe case and we actually believe
, you might believe, that wordsand intention behind words can
(23:40):
have positive effects onbiological systems.
And, by the way, let's justtake a step back here and just
think about this for a minute.
If I tell you you are sobeautiful, you are so courageous
, you are so strong, I'm soproud of you.
Now, you know, when I say thatto you right Some of you, I bet,
(24:02):
just listening to this when youhear those words, you feel good
.
You feel good.
There's a resonance that comesover you, right, almost like
this ah, thank you, jade, thatfeels really good.
So we know that words can makeus feel good.
Now, do we really think thatthat biology, that feeling that
(24:23):
we're having, is simply a resultof what's going on in our brain
?
Or could we potentially seethat that could create, almost
like a cymatic effect, aresonant effect that goes out
through our whole body and makesus feel good and influences the
cells?
And if we do believe that, whatdo we think might be
contributing to that thing?
When I say, oh my gosh, you'reso beautiful, when you feel that
(24:47):
, what might we think is thething that is transmitting that
energy into ourselves?
Well, it could be thebiological water.
And so, certainly, when I tellyou you're so beautiful, you can
feel that, especially whensomeone you love tells you that
right.
There's even been really coolresearch that shows that when
you tell your dog I love you,that the dog actually has
(25:09):
reduced cortisol and differenteffects.
Well, how does that impact ourhormonal system if it's not
impacting our cells?
And so is it really that far ofa jump to suggest that the word
, seeing a word on the page, isgoing to have that effect?
And then now here's the reallybig jump that cells can somehow
pick up the energy of this whenthey can't even see the word,
(25:34):
that words, just just by beingput down on paper, have a
particular energy to it, and soI know this is controversial and
incredibly interesting, and whoknows if this is the case, but
this particular study, I think,is a really, really important
one to begin looking at.
If we're going to really startto be serious about some of
(25:58):
these things that we hear aboutin self-development, we need to
have some evidence around them,and this particular study seems
to suggest that there are somereally interesting things going
on here, right?
Some really interesting thingsgoing on.
So this particular study, fengQ et al.
Information Fields of WrittenText Protect Cells from Oxidated
(26:21):
Damage and Accelerate Repair.
This was published in thejournal Explore in 2023.
Some of the other research ifyou want to get into this, if
you're interested in the Emotowork and you haven't seen that,
that was published in 2004.
He wrote a book called Healingwith Water and he has published
(26:45):
in the Journal of AlternativeComplementary Medicine back in
2004.
And then Gerald Pollack's workis the Fourth Phase of Water.
This was published back in 2013.
The Fourth Phase of Water thiswas published back in 2013.
So what do we do with thisinformation?
Well, it's just usefulinformation, I think,
interesting information, andcertainly in the work that I do
(27:06):
in my coaching, we look at theidea of self-talk.
We look at the idea of howself-talk can impact us and our
emotional states.
We look at how our emotionalstates have stories associated
with them and how our emotionalstates can create stories in and
of themselves and how thesestories are influencing our
(27:27):
identity.
And now we have certain ways oflooking at words very
differently and seeing them notjust impacting us in this way,
but perhaps having directinfluence over our emotional
state.
So for those of you who areinterested in things like
neuro-linguistic programming,the value of self-talk and all
(27:48):
of these kinds of things, thisshould give you some pause and
food for thought, and so I'mgoing to end here today.
Some pause and food for thought, and so I'm going to end here
today.
I hope you enjoyed this episode, as always.
If you liked what you heardtoday and you want to continue
(28:09):
supporting the Next Level Humanpodcast, the best way to do that
is go over to iTunes or yourfavorite podcasting application.
Give us a review.
I love getting reviews from allof you.
It really helps spread the newsof the show.
Appreciate you very much fordoing that and I will see you at
the next episode.
Popular Podcasts
Cold Case Files: Miami
Joyce Sapp, 76; Bryan Herrera, 16; and Laurance Webb, 32—three Miami residents whose lives were stolen in brutal, unsolved homicides. Cold Case Files: Miami follows award‑winning radio host and City of Miami Police reserve officer Enrique Santos as he partners with the department’s Cold Case Homicide Unit, determined family members, and the advocates who spend their lives fighting for justice for the victims who can no longer fight for themselves.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.