A breakdown of the healthline.com article on Structured Water
By Jonathan Butts
Structured Water is an ambiguous marketing term which has seemed to anchor itself in the flow in recent times. Although its ambiguity may be helpful in preserving its shelf life in marketing terms, it none the less fails to isolate the many different faces of water. For those who are aware of the topic, the term is at equal odds between miracle and scam.
Water has been perhaps the most studied substance in history we know least about. Perhaps because human beings and their institutions are infatuated with "break down" science and analyze by breaking things apart, and the more you break things apart the farther one removes themselves from the essence of nature.
For if we take an atomist or chemical view of the world (materialist), everything is just a particle or particles free to name, without its former state of systems or group interaction. It is more or less like describing a car as a hunk of metal and a few other things after melting it all down.
I am greatly appreciative that the recent article written by healthline.com https://www.healthline.com/health/structured-water for the fact that they did not lambaste water and its true observers in a similar manner to other meta researchers such as chem1.com The work there obviously driven with intention to prevent the real in depth work and study of water from spreading or to be the savior principle for poor ignorant souls who are not aware water is nothing but H20 - and there is nothing more to it. What a boring life. A mechanized and quantized substance that has nothing to do with the fundamentals of biological life. But hey, every sport needs its hecklers. Water still loves them the same.
The real issue here is not water, but integrity. In addition, these doctrines break things into pieces and name these things, sometimes after themselves and define these titles with a bunch of more words. In other words, defining water as H20 is like calling a bumper a car. And you can't define words, by hanging a bunch of more words behind it. It's the opposite of definition. You must experience the words to know them. Object - motion - description of the two. That's it.
It is also painfully obvious, that no matter the institution, there is no real world litmus test for the actual execution in which the titles imply. In reality, from my perspective, no matter what the title or institution, a small percentage of the accolades actually amount to any level of performance which I would consider quintessential to the trade. Perhaps this is how the term "structured water" arose, and perhaps the controversy is essential to get attention.
Marketing has nothing to do with the observation of water, though it should.
Everyone has an oath to be true to themselves and their trade. Everyone. Perhaps it is just taken more seriously in view of human life. But in reality, it is all life.
In the market place, anything goes, so long as there are no claims to cure or prevent disease, and rightfully so. The factors that are present in regards to human health are so ridiculous, that trying to make an isolation is a fool's paradise. For instance, if someone is the epitome of physical health in all aspects measurable, but lies, cheats, and takes advantage of everything; would we consider them healthy?
If anyone has an obligation to take an in depth view of water and health, it certainly would be favorable for a Doctor or any other health practitioner. Why? Simply because water is the foundation of biological life. It somehow must contain the attributes that comprise life. It is the simplest control to begin the observation. When Dr. Batman wrote his book, "You're not sick, you're thirsty" it opened a door to some serious preponderances. Notably the institution of natural salt into the hydration protocol for effectiveness. Hmmm.
Since those who understand "functional" water and how that relates to "structured water" also know that structured water is naturally occurring in the biology of the animals and plants at the cellular level, then one may ask why they would need to drink "structured water"? The answer is rather obvious, in that when the body begins to lose its structure, it starts losing the ability to structure water. In my opinion, dehydration could be the cause, but there are also many other causes.
Dr. Mu Shik Jhon, through well documented NMR work, noted percentage change of hexagonal structures within all water, and how they changed under influence of the environment. But calling natural water Hexagonal Water or magnetic water structured water is like calling the frame of a car, a car. The terms cannot be interchanged. One is a part, and the other is a whole. Every atom has structure, so therefore the term 'structured water' is really a poor term. But its OK, we can run with it - assuming we understand that water factual possesses principles of self - ordering, down to the physical level, and once ordered can re-order itself when not excessively disturbed.
All water has order and function. The break point of this definition comes from somewhere. I would propose that it arrives in the contamination of process by way of motion and excessive entropy (disorder), in which Andreas Schultz shows us; that quality water by definition should not contain right angle structures viewed by systematic observation during crystal microscopy; a little known extremely simple method of analyzing fluids, in particular water.
I must consider now my own words here. It is rather obvious I am a proponent of water changing its core behavior. I am not a proponent of trying to name it beyond its base, But so the story goes and the way the water flows.
