The data in the two tables correspond to the y-coordinate (in tenths of millimeter) of the points in Fig 3a and Fig 3c in Hirst et al., where, as stated therein, each point is the mean of the triplicate determinations in a single experiment. The points were measured by me using a rule. The accuracy of my measurements (or lack thereof) can be verified by anyone with some goodwill and a rule. My measurement endeavour was triggered by the adamant refusal of Hirst et al. to make their raw data available to public scrutiny. A millimeter corresponds approximately to 0,41 percentage points, hence the formula: mean average degranulation = sum(height of single points)/(5*4,1) and sum(height of single points)/(3*4,1) for high dilutions and succussed buffer respectively. The reader can decide whether the data, as plotted herewith, provide supporting evidence for Jacques Benveniste`s claims on "waves caused by extreme dilution". A T-test (average) on the two unaveraged distributions yields a value of 0,000119 while an an F-test (variation) yields a value of 0,00000000232 , reflecting the fact that, as already revealed by the t- and p-values in Hirst et al., the difference in variation are even more striking than those in average.The most unexpected feature of the plot is the apparent periodicity in basophils degranulation in the succussed buffer. Such an effect may well be an optical fluke or whatever. If the effect is real however, then periodicity may be an intrinsic property of basophil degranulation, while highly diluted treatments increase variation and average degranulation. The time structure of measurements (i.e. basophil counts), , which has never been considered in the experimental setting, may be crucial: basophils may always subsist as an oscillating superposition between degranulating and non-degranulating state, along the lines proposed in my high-dilutions quantum model (i.e. me, see http://www.weirdtech.com/sci/feynman.html). Highly diluted treatments may just boost the amplitude of the degranulating state as revealed by increased variation and mean.

Data from Fig. 3a of Hirst et al.

Log10 Dilution factor	12	14	16	18	20	22	24	26	30	32	34	36	38	40	42	44	46	48	50	52	54	56	58	60
	40	47	68	105	68	65	104	58	118	140	54	56	105	112	137	91	61	100	68	118	125	120	130	145
	23	29	27	30	42	47	59	43	9	-19	45	35	53	41	-3	57	36	52	43	95	109	30	120	133
	5	13	11	19	35	43	8	36	-10	-45	-30	10	12	-7	-24	4	22	37	35	88	45	12	75	28
	-42	-12	-35	-62	5	11	-50	-10	-60	-51	-38	-12	-7	-25	-50	-68	13	25	-40	84	3	5	39	-3
	-48	-78	-105	-72	-11	-42	-115	-12	-70	-58	-50	-20	-50	-49	-55	-125	-35	-18	-82	-40	-38	-1	30	-9
Avg. Degranulation %	-1,073	-0,048	-1,65	0,975	6,78	6,048	0,29	5,60	-0,63	-1,60	-0,92	3,36	5,51	3,51	0,24	-2	4,732	9,56	1,17	16,82	11,90	8,09	19,21	14,34

Data from Fig. 3c of Hirst et al.

Log10 Dilution factor	12	14	16	18	20	22	24	26	30	32	34	36	38	40	42	44	46	48	50	52	54	56	58	60
	90	33	18	65	-11	22	62	46	15	4	16	60	1	-15	16	13	-9	3	-5	25	25	12	-12	30
	-35	-31	-2	10	-20	4	5	-4	-20	1	1	-18	-8	-25	2	-25	-23	-40	-9	8	8	-5	-28	0
	-45	-47	-28	6	-32	-39	-20	-31	-75	-50	-11	-22	-14	-49	-12	-29	-26	-59	-22	-5	-4	-45	-49	-24
Avg. Degranulation %	0,813	-3,7	-0,98	6,59	-5,1	-1,06	3,82	0,894	-6,5	-3,7	0,49	1,6	-1,71	-7	0,5	-3,3	-4,7	-8	-2,9	2,28	2,4	-3,09	-7,2	0,5