Crimson Publishers Publish With Us Reprints e-Books Video articles

Abstract

Open Journal of Cardiology & Heart Diseases

How Quantum Biology Can Eradicate Heart Diseases

  • Open or Close Marco Ruggiero*

    Silver Spring Sagl, Switzerland

    *Corresponding author: Ruggiero Marco, Founder and CEO of Silver Spring, Via Raimondo Rossi 24, Arzo-Mendrisio 6864, Switzerland

Submission: March 26, 2018; Published: April 04, 2018

DOI: 10.31031/OJCHD.2018.01.000520

ISSN : 2578-0204
Volume1 Issue4

Abstract

The title of this opinion article is a homage to Professor Hameroff’s paper of 2012 entitled “How quantum brain biology can rescue conscious free will” where the role of quantum computations in microtubules inside brain neurons is described as it relates to the elusive concept of free will [1]. Quantum biology, and its applications in medicine, represents a fascinating new field of research where “spooky” (as in Einstein’s definition of entanglement, “spooky action at a distance”) phenomena occur. However, rather than being spooky, these apparently inexplicable phenomena may confer protection against stressors and, more in general, against diseases. In a very recent paper, researchers from the McMaster and Queen’s Universities of Canada, described results related to radiation-induced bystander effect that can be explained only by taking into consideration quantum biological processes at the level of complex organisms such as rainbow trout or zebra fish [2]. In this study, the Authors observed that both types of fish were able to anticipate a biological response to events that had not yet occurred, as if some form of entanglement between fish exposed or nonexposed to ionizing radiations had taken place. Interestingly, these biological responses had a protective meaning as if the irradiated fish “warned” the non-irradiated animals to take precautions against a harmful event. In layman’s words, the irradiated fish had experienced the harmful effects of an environmental stressors, had adapted accordingly by implementing protective responses, and then, showing a remarkable display of altruism, had “shared”, in ways that still have to be described, this bad experience with the non-irradiated fish so that they could be prepared and protected just in case the experimenters decided to irradiate them. Quite obviously, the non-irradiated fish who had learned from the bad experience of the irradiated ones, have now a significant advantage; should they be irradiated, they are protected.

Get access to the full text of this article