Gwyneth Paltrow thinks you can change water molecules by being mean to them

FFN_Paltrow_Gwyneth_BOAZ_EXC_042914_51397525

This story is literally a week old, but it’s slow this week and some sites have only just started to cover it. In last week’s Goop-letter, Gwyneth Paltrow shilled for one of her snake-oil salesmen, some guy who presents himself as a medical doctor. That’s been one of the most amazing things about Gwyneth’s Goop – we get an insider’s look at the people Gwyneth surrounds herself with, and while I believe there are many celebrities who surround themselves with yes-men and enablers, the fact that Gwyneth doesn’t know the difference is somewhat unsettling. She will fall for anything having to do New Age crap, diets, juice fasts or “energies.” This was her Goop-letter:

I am fascinated by the growing science behind the energy of consciousness and its effects on matter. I have long had Dr. Emoto’s coffee table book on how negativity changes the structure of water, how the molecules behave differently depending on the words or music being expressed around it. Below, Dr. Sadeghi explores further.

Also we went to NYC last week and crushed a number of spots that deserve to make an update (and some that don’t).

Plus some other bits, remixes, and the like.

Love,
Gp

[From Goop]

You read that correctly. Gwyneth is promoting the work of Masaru Emoto, who conducts experiments where he literally hurts the feelings of water samples (he yells at the water) and then he freezes the samples and the water freezes in an unpleasant way. But he praises other water samples and freezes them and they freeze in a pleasant way. Basically, Gwyneth surrounds herself with people who think you shouldn’t yell at water because you’ll hurt water’s feelings. And that water changes at a molecular level because of feelings.

I stopped myself short of calling this crap a pseudo-science because… well, God knows. There’s scientific evidence to suggest that plants have energies and they respond to positive and negative stimuli, so maybe water is the same, although “feelings” won’t change water on a molecular level. That’s not the point. The point is that this is what Gwyneth spends her time thinking about – energies and water and how we’re all being “negative” and changing her molecular structure. She’s an idiot.

FFN_Paltrow_Gwyneth_BoazFF_051014_51407390

Photos courtesy of Fame/Flynet.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

235 Responses to “Gwyneth Paltrow thinks you can change water molecules by being mean to them”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Soulange says:

    Why so surprised…Its Gwenyth we’re talking about.

    • Dee says:

      Seriously, isn’t Gwen one of those ‘too rich for college’ nouveau riche. I mean, I know she comes from a very wealthy family but she isn’t living of an inheritance or trust fund. Most of her money comes from her movie and Goop ventures, right? These are the kind of gullible people that fall for this crap. Too much money not enough common sense and when the creator/doctor is coming to you specifically and making you feel like part of the fold because they’re divulging these secrets to you directly –I know that’s not what happened here–then they always feel privileged to be the ones to introduce it to other ‘lesser privileged’ people. Gwen aint unique there. I’m always delighted to find which celebrities are willing to publicly promote and lend their name to these new age science finds.

      • Hautie says:

        “I know she comes from a very wealthy family but she isn’t living of an inheritance or trust fund. Most of her money comes from her movie and Goop ventures, right?…”
        ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
        I hate that I can recall this… but I saw a interview with Gwyneth many years ago.

        Before she became this total nut case. Where she spoke freely about growing up without a lot of obvious wealth. That her Father did not throw money around.

        They lived a very middle class life style. Even though he did work consistently they were never truly rich. Like she enjoys now to imply that they were. That once she got grown and left home. She was financially on her own. She was responsible for her own bills. And he would not pay them.

        Of course as she told this tale.. it was because she was whining about it. But he told her she was always welcome to come home and eat, if she was hungry. Because he would not be paying for her to run around LA burning through his cash.

        So every time I see her out there, acting as if she had been raised with great wealth and had that very Waspy east coast life style… I know she didn’t. It is just something she created in the last decade or so. That she seems determined to be the center of.

        Where I suspect that old money group… who Summers in the Hampton’s… are highly amused by her. But rarely invites her to their BBQ’s.

      • lucy2 says:

        Somehow, I suspect that her idea of “growing up middle class” is a little different than most. Like, “OMG, we only had 2 maids instead of the usual 4.”

      • Birdix says:

        Eh, she went to Spence, she’s in with the old money.

      • Sighs says:

        I thought I read somewhere that her father bought her way into a UC school, Santa Barbara? And that she didnt end up completing her degree. I’m sorry, too lazy to look it up.
        I bet her idea of roughing it starting out was like this friend of mine from college. His parents paid for his school, rent, car and food, but he had to “earn” his “fun money”. Unlike the rest of us who had to take out loans and work while going to school full time.
        Still don’t feel bad for her.

      • Randie says:

        @Bread and Circuses If a particle has a photon of light on it and you claim that is what changed the behavior of the particle -that still had to be observed. So IMO their is no separation of the two.

      • Liza says:

        @hautie She definitely didn’t live a middle class life style. I went to the same private school as her in NYC, Spence, (I was one year younger ) and nothing about that school or the people in it were anything but ultra privileged. Multiple homes, horses, summers in Europe was the norm. That being said it was a REALLY hard school. Like college level stuff in 10th grade so she definitely wasn’t dumb or a total slacker. Everybody worked or you failed out. There was no way around it. But a down to earth environment it was not.

      • Janet says:

        Birdix, Kerry Washington went to Spence, and she was definitely not old money.

      • Lee says:

        Dr Emoto received his “doctorate” from an alternative medicine college – you only need Wikipedia for that info. Seems any hack can claim a PhD these days and make scientific proclamations.

        @Tessy, fyi, a scientific “theory” (ie, evolution as you said) is different to a regular theory. It is a hypothesis which is backed up by rigorous and repeated testing and evidence. A scientific theory explains something that has been confirmed by evidence and peer review. And it is abundantly clear that you know absolutely nothing about the science you so readily dismiss, so best you say nothing about it.

      • LaurieH says:

        In response to Hautie: if Gwyneth once gave an interview in which she stated that she grew up in a “very middle class lifestyle” without any “obvious wealth”, I can tell you for FACT that she’s either lying or delusional. How do I know this? Because – at least during her teen years – she grew up next door to my godparents in a VERY exclusive village in New York (north of he City)….and my godparents are multi-MULTI- millionaires. There is nothing “middle class” about that area and just being there is a sign of obvious wealth. In fact, I have a few personal memories of Gwyneth as a teen whilst visiting my godparents (nothing bad, but just the usual over-privileged, wild-child stuff). I don’t know a single person that would look at their house (or cars in the driveway) and think “middle class.” Which is not to say that Bruce Paltrow and Blythe Danner were ostentatious – they were not. They didn’t live like, say, Donald Trump, but more like the Romneys…where it was obvious they had money, even if they weren’t being flashy about it. So either Gwyneth is lying or she delusionally thinks that her parents’ brand of quiet wealth was peasanty and “middle class.”

      • Bread and Circuses says:

        @ Randie
        You apparently have no understanding of what makes the double-slit experiment interesting, because your answer shows you don’t even comprehend what the “observation” is or when it takes place.

        In the double-slit experiment, electrons that pass through two closely-spaced slits will form an interference pattern on the wall (i.e. they act like waves, not particles) PROVIDED you don’t bounce light off them to determine WHICH slit the electrons passed through.

        If you do determine which slit the electron passed through, then the pattern on the wall looks different. You don’t see an interference pattern. Instead, the electrons act like discrete lumps of matter rather than waves.

        The pattern on the wall is seen by humans in both cases, but that observation is not even PART of the double-slit experiment. The fact you focused on that at all shows you don’t understand the first thing about this.

        The “observation” that makes this experiment so noteworthy is entirely the act of a bouncing photons off the electrons to see where they are. It’s more of a measurement than an observation.

        And that measurement has zero to do with humans (or their feelings.) The experimenters don’t even need to be in the room; they can go watch TV and come back later to look at the picture on the wall. The experiment’s results are reproducible without any person being there to “observe”.

        I.e. the “observation” is really a measurement of electron’s position.

        PS regarding your comment down-thread:
        Energy does not equal emotion. Your logic is flawed right from the get-go. To a physicist (like Einstein), the word energy means “the capacity to make something move”.

        Emotions don’t make things move.

      • Randie says:

        @Bread and Circuses I respectfully disagree with all of your statements. My beliefs are different from yours. Lets just leave it at that 🙂

    • BReed says:

      This is a lot of crap. Some people believe anything. Rasputiin is a good example of this.

      • gefeylich says:

        I find it hilarious that this sounds exactly like the pink goop in “Ghostbusters II” – soaking up all the “bad energy.”

        That said, Paltrow is an entitled tool who is obviously also quite gullible and eager to impress her unenlightened peasant followers.

    • heidi says:

      Nothing wrong with Emoto’s observations and they go much more in depth than described here. Before the harsh criticisms why not explore his findings with an open mind. Open mind to consider = real intelligence. Once that’s been done either dismiss it as bunk or admit you learned something new.

      • teatimescoming says:

        Because chemistry doesnt have feelings, and neither does mathematics. Molecules of water aren’t sentient; they dont have emotions. It’s ridiculous. Suggesting that we need to approach this “research” with an open mind is worthy of great derision

      • cr says:

        “observations’ aren’t facts, especially when no one else has been able to replicate them.
        That’s not a ‘harsh criticism’, that’s fact based criticism.

      • videli says:

        I reserve my open-mindedness for experiments repeatedly replicated in controlled environments and observed by Emoto’s peers (or real scientists).

        I’m gonna go yell at my faucet now.

      • Bernice says:

        There is substantial research that shows we and everything in our universe are part of one force field. Gary Zukov describes non-locality in his book The Seat of the Soul. Thoughts have power as described by the famous double blind slit test and the observer and observation can change the outcome of an event. Plants respond on an electrical basis to thought. This has been proven. Water is no different. Everything in the world is inter-related and your thoughts, feelings and emotions DO have an observable effect. I am no Gwenyth fan but the level of disbelief here is akin to the flat eart hers who refused to belief the earth was a sphere.

      • videli says:

        That’s it. From now on I’m blaming my hangover headaches on turbulence in the Gamma Quadrant.

      • Kiddo says:

        @Bernice, Gary Zukov is a new age-y philosopher, not a scientist.

      • kiwi says:

        Normally I’d agree with this sentiment, but he was exposed as a fraud years back. I can’t remember the details, but IIRC someone on his team said he would go through the photos of his ice crystals and give the pretty ones positive labels regardless of what the water was subjected to.

      • msw says:

        people with faith in science do consider everything. they stop considering ideas which don’t make any sense.

      • The Original G says:

        I’m not dismissing Emoto’s observations. Gwyneth Paltrow’s banal over-simplification is the real demonsrtation of lack of intelligence.

      • Lucrezia says:

        @ Bernice: Do you mean the double slit test? (A double-blind test is something else). The double-slit test simply shows that light acts as both a wave and a particle … it says jack about thoughts having power. You don’t need a conscious observer to do the double-slit test, you can do it with a particle detector. You’re getting mysticism all up in my quantum physics 🙁

        As for the telepathic plants, that’s pure hokum. That “experiment” is such bad science that it’s actually worth reading the full details of what happened, just for giggles. http://www.skepdic.com/plants.html

      • JenniferJustice says:

        I read it and what was more interesting were the real scientists’ say on the subject which debunked Emoto’s theory in the first sentence, “he only chose to photograph/record the crystals that looked different in order to further his agenda.” Nuff said! Just another whack guru the ignorant w/money believe. Spectacularly stupid!

      • lrm says:

        Calling them ‘feelings’ is not quite accurate-that’s a human subjective spin. The scientific aspect would be that a feeling carries a tone or vibration-which is certainly true-you can tell someone is angry without speaking their language, usually. Babies may not understand words but they understand emotional tone, for example. Tone and sound have vibration-this IS fact. Music, voice, noise pollution [and its documented effects on human behavior and health-this is not just affecting the auditory system, but also the brain/nervous system, etc] are all vibrational.

        One could argue that humans are only affected by vibration of a human voice b/c of emotion, but we are also affected by noise from other sources, including musical instruments, cars, planes, industrial, etc. So, correlation to emotion only does not fit. Correlation to sound and hence vibration makes more sense to me. As far as ‘thoughts’ affecting water, without speaking them, one can check the extensive research done on telepathy and paranormal studies…Stanford university (remote viewing, etc), Russia and others have invested quite a bit of time, experience and money into these topics, with varying conclusions.

        The point of this ‘study’, if you will, is that vibration can and does affect water. I don’t think this is far fetched as a concept. But people will slam it [simply b/c it doesn’t fit with the science of the last 400 years as we’ve known it] and/or dilute it to make it into something else-such as Goopy schilling it or proponents using biased statistics or info to make it into something bigger than it is.

        By the way, she’s late to the party: This water stuff was big like 10 years ago. They were selling adhesive labels for water bottles at that time that cheesy movie ‘what the bleep’ was out.

        Goopy acts like she’s cutting edge-but this has already been done.

      • Azurea says:

        Heidi: “an open mind = real intelligence”

        Thank you. So many angry, defensive replies here. 🙂

      • tessy says:

        Thank you Heidi. Just because people don’t like Gwyneth doesn’t mean that she’s wrong on everything.

        Science is today’s religion. Too often modern science has a desired result and form their studies to conform to the desired result. Then it gets peer reviewed and published and all is well in the scientific world. Even evolution is the “theory” of evolution for pete’s sake.

        That skepdik site is full of it I would take anything they say with a grain of salt too.

      • Lucinda says:

        Heidi, just because someone says something, doesn’t make it true. I see all sorts of ideas on the internet all the time, sadly boiled down to soundbites much like your open mind=real intelligence. The truth is real intelligence requires healthy skepticism which is being illustrated in abundance here. The Internet has given legitimacy to all sorts of ideas being presented through repetition and the appearance of professionalism, something not possible 20-30 years ago.

        I would argue this board and its participants have exceptionally open minds. Open mind means looking at all aspects of something which the comments here reflect. Clearly many had already heard this theory and researched it long before Goop promoted it. That is the very definition of open mind.

      • cr says:

        @Azurea:
        “Azurea says:
        June 5, 2014 at 12:15 pm

        Heidi: “an open mind = real intelligence”

        Thank you. So many angry, defensive replies here. ”

        To quote GK Chesterton: “Do not be so open-minded that your brains fall out.”

        Angry, defensive? More like mocking.

        You are entitled to your belief in this, but beliefs are not facts. Attempting to pass it off as science is misleading, and frankly unnecessary.

      • strangevista says:

        Everything is sentient. Just to different degrees.

      • Bread and Circuses says:

        @Bernice

        I have a master’s degree in physics and everything you just said is bunk. To be more polite, it’s incorrect.

        When you “observe” something, that means you detect the light that bounced off it.

        When you’re talking about a single electron, such as in the famous double-slit experiment, even a single photon of light bouncing off it changes the behaviour of that particle. Even one photon of light glancing off it will collapse its wave function.

        And THAT is what changes the behaviour of the electron in the double-slit experiment. It’s not due to the mystical woo-woo of someone staring at it — it’s due to the fact that you hit one tiny particle with another tiny particle (instead of leaving the first tiny particle alone.)

        As for the idea that the universe is all part of one field (not a “force field”, that’s Star Trek garbage), that may be true but you can calculate EXACTLY (like, with real math) how likely it is for non-local effects to happen. The chance that one electron of my body would quantum mechanically “tunnel” over to water sitting a metre away from me is so small that the age of the universe (all 14 billion years of it) would be not even close to long enough to wait for this to happen even once.

        So no, thoughts don’t affect matter, and while everything in the universe might be connected in some way, it’s pretty clear from both experiments and day-to-day evidence that objects separated by large physical distances don’t affect each other. The wave function of a particle falls off too quickly, i.e. goes to zero in a short physical space.

      • Randie says:

        e=mc2. Einstein, the great physicist said it best- matter=energy. Dr Emoto sought out to prove that we can affect things like water with emotions such as love and fear. Also our bodies are made up of 70% water.

      • Stef Leppard says:

        @bread and circuses
        Very interesting. Thanks!

      • LAK says:

        What Bread and circuses said. Chemistry degree here.

        What is it with people adding hokum to basic Physics and chemistry and insisting they are right?

        Randie: “Dr Emoto sought out to prove that we can affect things like water with emotions such as love and fear.”

        Do you believe this statement to be true? i’m confused as to whether you are supporting his experiments or simply pointing out more bullocks from this quack doctor.

      • siri says:

        I completely agree. Too many simplifications in the original article, not enough knowledge, or willingness to go deeper into this. Einstein already proved that energy and matter are the same. It’s a fact, not fiction. Emotions, thoughts, feelings are there, yet not visible. And energy exchange happens everywhere, whether we can see it, or not. In fact, at a German university in Stuttgart, they proved Emoto’s research to be correct:
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILSyt_Hhbjg

    • starrywonder says:

      My God she is tiresome as hell.

      • SuzieQ says:

        Randie, it is so obvious that you are just quoting a formula that you have heard of but have no idea what it means.

      • Randie says:

        @SuzieQ Is that your scientific observation of me? What makes you think you know anything about me? Almost everyone has heard of Einstein so that was the most obvious formula to comment about. End of story!

  2. paola says:

    She has too much time on her hands. Someone give her a job please or this waffling will be endless.

    • annaloo. says:

      She should do some charity work. There is always a need for that. Put herself to some REAL good, instead of this airy-fairy new money BS snob lifestyle she keeps trying to make happen for the masses.

      We’re not buying $8000 eiderdown duvets, Gwyneth, but we’ll listen to you if you want to put blankets on the homeless the next coming winter.

      That would be truly “enlightened” work.

    • Rice says:

      Years ago, my granny (may she rest in peace) told me that she grew up using rachet (a kind of cactus) as shampoo and charcoal as toothpaste. In fact, some older people use homemade tumeric powder as toothpaste. Now if I can get Her Royal Goopness to take my suggestions, then I’ll be set for life.

  3. eva says:

    She needs to talk more positively to her hair bleach, might not look like a cheap diy job, then.

    • Vampi says:

      OMG too funny! Too true! Haha!

    • mimif says:

      Ha. She’s obviously been projecting very negative thoughts onto it.

    • Dinah says:

      Seriously. She has been looking hella hideously brassy lately. You’d think with her cash, she could buy a toning treatment. Sheesh.

      • JenniferJustice says:

        And Hello! Some leave in conditioner or better than the one she is using that probably costs $500/bottle and for naught.

      • Lee says:

        I don’t think conditioner or a toning treatment would help her. Her hair is completely damaged from the excessive bleaching. Seriously, she needs a new “do” coz that one is making her look haggard and dried out.

    • Lex says:

      That hair colour is plain awful. A shame to all blondes.

    • eva k says:

      I know, right! I’ve been noticing for a while that her hair is orangey-yellow. Any decent colorist could tone it easily. What’s up with that?

  4. Rhea says:

    Bwahahahahahahahahhaahhahahahahahah. Don’t know what you girls think, but sometimes what’s inside her head could be entertaining/amusing for me. 😛

    I mean seriously, she seems to focus only about stuff like this or her bubble world.
    I must say though, I always think that if you have a negative way of looking at your life and the people around you—you’re most likely won’t be a happy person. So who knows about this theory. 😉

    • Dee says:

      I’m not a scientist but I’m gonna throw my hat in the ring on this one and say unequivocally that unless your breath is hot like halitosis and you can directly turn water to steam by breathing on it then you screaming obscenities or talking sweet nothings to a any body of water isn’t going to change it’s molecular makeup. Seriously, if emotions can change the molecular makeup of water in either direction then all the water in January Jones’ house would be frozen.

      • Rhea says:

        LMFAO. 😀

      • JenniferJustice says:

        Like, does the water only know Japanese? Were the tests done in another country and you had to translate for the water? Do you call the water, “water” or do you give it an individual name because it’s feelings get hurt when you generalize it? I have questions that need answers damn it!

      • Rice says:

        HAHAHAHAHA!!! You folks are cracking me up!

  5. Sixer says:

    It’s funny because I have a dripping tap in my bathroom. I broke a nail on it earlier, trying to turn it completely off because Mr Sixer was supposed to do spanner-things with it last night and clearly forgot. I swore at the tap. I swore at the tap like a docker, actually. It refused to be cowed and is still dripping. Should I return and cajole it with some positive energy instead? I think not. In fact, the very thought is making me want to swear like a docker AGAIN.

    (This is a true thing that happened chez Sixer this morning. Honest).

    • Elisabeth says:

      THIS X 100000000000000

      I love you

      and mister sixer

    • Naomi says:

      I’ve found using the appropriate harsh language is the key around dripping faucets. Perhaps if you raised the negativity level expressing the wonders of a judiciously wielded hammer that faucet might pipe down. Lol.

      Seriously, drippy faucets drive me mad. Mine always begin in the middle of the night.

    • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

      Oh, be careful. I told my drippy faucet I’d fix it’s little red wagon, and I got vise grips and turned really hard…and the handle snapped off. Damn.

    • Mon says:

      Sixer, give it a hug and see what happens! 😉 please don’t forget to update us and goop on the result 🙂

    • Sixer says:

      Mr Sixer is now home and has been despatched on fixing duties, replete with toolbox AND positive vibes. (I defined positive vibes to him very clearly, since oddjobbing doesn’t usually elicit this reaction from him). I will report back.

      BTW: the dripping tap is entirely his responsibility as he was the person who affixed the garden hose to it at the weekend in some horticultural experiment or other (it’s the downstairs bathroom – he wasn’t sprinkling from on high or anything).

      • FLORC says:

        My face hurts from too much laughing sixer!

        And Gwyneth is just silly. I get where she’s going with this, but it’s just wrong.
        Never was big on new age stuff.

      • Sighs says:

        Don’t you just love it when men get “great ideas”?

    • Green Is Good says:

      Sixer; Ha ha ha ha ha!!!!!

  6. swack says:

    I was so hoping you would comment on this story when I saw it on DM.

  7. Hannah says:

    How respectable/serious a scientist can he be anyway if he has published a coffee table book?

    • RobN says:

      Really, my first thought was about the weirdness of the very idea of a coffee table book on this topic.

    • Rice says:

      It’s called the International Journal of the Coffee Table, a very reputable journal in the science of bullcrap.

    • L says:

      Better yet, goop actually reads her coffee table books?

    • Bob Loblaw says:

      It’s not respectable or science, so there’s that.

  8. Mimi says:

    Does anyone else think Gwyneth is doing all this for attention? It’s some sort of master plan? I mean this seriously, the way I actually think Miley’s entire s**t act is a façade and she’s totally in control (basically the only Disney star to never have been arrested or sent to rehab or had fully naked pictures leak out).

    Goop is obviously aware the public hates her (Star Magazine most hated and the way Blythe Danner was forced to defend her) and they think she’s a rich pretentious snob, but she doesn’t change her ways……

    I mean she’s pretty irrelevant at this point in her career without Iron Man, so this is the only way to keep it going?

    • SpookySpooks says:

      I totally agree about Miley, but I could see Gwyneth actually believing this crap.

    • Kiddo says:

      Yep. My first thought was Trolls gonna troll. I’m not sure how you make money off of that, but the phrase, “There’s a sucker born every minute” uttered possibly by David Hannum in criticism of PT Barnum and his customers (and then later attributed to Barnum) resonates here. It would also seem to be a strong reason for the success of the K-Klan.

      Although, for all the barkering, I have never partaken in either viewing the K-Klan show or Trollie’s blog, so I’m not sure how nonsense makes cash, but somehow it does. The freak side-show is alive on a large scale.

    • Hmmm says:

      I wouldn’t call her irrelevant, she had a NYT bestseller and she is still doing movies on a regular bases. That conference she did some days ago also had speakers from some of the top world entrepreneurs like Google, Instagram and Uber, she was invited to speak there.
      The press is sucking up her every move, so I doubt she will be going away or will be forgotten anytime soon. She is on a long term strategy and I wouldn’t be surprised if this online business isn’t going to be successful.
      That said, this water pseudo science stuff is absolute BS!

    • Dinah says:

      No, I think goopster is going off the rails, publicly, and slowly.

      • PunkyMomma says:

        I agree about Goopster going off the rails publicly, but it seems to be at an increasingly speedier rate.

  9. msw says:

    She’s one of those smart people who threw it all away in favor of taking mysticism to the extreme. Science when convenient but only if it supports whatever irrational, outdated theory I like right now.

    • annaloo. says:

      I absolutely agree with you on all your points except “she’s one of those smart people.”

      She clearly isn’t! =-P

    • Bob Loblaw says:

      She’s not smart, not now, not ever.

  10. spugzbunny says:

    ‘There’s scientific evidence to suggest that plants have energies and they respond to positive and negative stimuli’

    No I seriously doubt it. For a start no scientist would refer to ‘plant engergies’. I would be very interested in seeing studies that stand up to the scientific method.

    • Izzy says:

      Exactly. Those who “talk nicely” to their plants (there are many who do, they simply love gardening), also tend to actually take better care of their plants, which is why those plants would tend to thrive.

      Goop would never be able to figure this out. She’d miss the whole point of it because her maid would be taking care of the plant. Because, you know, her life as a working mother is SO exhausting.

      • Kiddo says:

        It also may have to do with the exhalation of carbon dioxide and the plant’s process of photosynthesis.

      • Dinah says:

        Or the talking gives the plants an intensive dose of CO2, which they inspire. Jeebus, they inspire CO2, and expire O2. Biology. ‘Nuff said.

      • Dinah says:

        @ Kiddo,

        Sorry, I somehow didn’t see your response before my knee- jerk reaction!

      • Kiddo says:

        @Dinah, no worries, it was probably ‘energie’s from some angry water you boiled for tea this morning, and also unicorns. Definitely unicorns, they are sneaky Aholes, never showing themselves.

      • Izzy says:

        OK, you guys took it to the next level. I bow to you. I mean, of course, photosynthesis, and the tending to (I don’t think positive reinforcing affirmations and singing to plants will take the place of pulling weeds, fertilizing and watering, but hey, we could all be wrong!).

        Now I’mma go science something. Science!

      • Jen2 says:

        I think that folks should go watch the original 1950s version of “The Thing from Another World” to understand what intelligent plants can really do. It ain’t pretty…but it is fun to watch!!

      • mimif says:

        Lmao Kiddo, you’re killing me.

      • TheOriginalKitten says:

        There is a history of tree-worshipping in Celtic culture (I worship “trees” as well 😉 ) and in Hinduism, where the worship of Tulsi and other sacred plants is very common.

        I have a ton of plants in my apartment and I care about them dearly-some I’ve had for more than 10 years.

        I can’t hate on anyone who loves their plants.
        Or smokes their plants for that matter.

      • Kiddo says:

        I LOVE plants too. But if complex human emotion worked, the poison ivy would have taken a hint long ago.

        I do feel an extreme connection to the plants, but I can’t say the same in reverse. Obviously I provide for their needs and that is what they respond to.

      • lrm says:

        Original Kitten-exactly. Tulsi is worshipped in the sense that it’s consciousness is revered in part due to its many healing properties. It translates as ‘balance the scales’. Many plants and trees provide anti fungal, viral and insecticide properties-sandalwood was used to build temples in part for this reason. Plants, as others will concede, do provide us with oxygen, removal of VOC’s in the air, etc. It’s not far fetched to think they might respond to vibration the environment. IMO, that’s what the discussion is really about-NOT human emotion, but vibration/tone and its affect on other living organisms, of which water is one or contains one or more. I feel a bit sorry for the people slamming so hard the idea that sound impacts living matter. Science *does* support this, as does common sense. My health is affected directly based on noises in my environment-pleasant or negative sounds/tones/vibrations have different affects. And, someone’s tone certainly changes my well being, not just emotionally, at least in the moment that I am speaking/interacting with them.

        Again, sound/tone carries vibration-and science has indeed worked with this concept in recent decades. There has been more emphasis on vibration affecting human emotion and physical health, and less research into the effects on, say, the electromagnetic field. [I don’t understand why people would be fine with discussing electromagnetics in abstract terms, or for ‘nature’/electricity, etc, but would likewise find it ridiculous that humans *might* be a part of this? Um, our bodies include some of the same matter found in other matter on earth.

      • lrm says:

        @kiddo: “I do feel an extreme connection to the plants, but I can’t say the same in reverse. Obviously I provide for their needs and that is what they respond to.”

        True, you cannot ‘say the same in reverse’. But you cannot ‘not’ say the same in reverse, either. People interpret ‘inconclusive’ science as ‘fact’, and that is just as bad as goopy acting like this water/emotion stuff is so personal. Just b/c science ‘doesn’t find somethign to be true’, doesn’t mean that it’s ‘not true’. It means that it cannot be confirmed as true. Those are two different things. When science does determine a non causal or correlative relationship, then it would be more accurate to say that science says it’s not true.

        In some cases, this will likely never happen. Such as this plant example. Not being able to confirm something doesn’t mean it confirms the opposite. [it’s like the age old god and spiritual questions-].

      • Kiddo says:

        In order for something to be proven conclusively, it must be able to be repeated and without bias of the observer. Of course if you blow on water, there will be ripples, and if you toss a stone, the same applies. And real energy is different than emotional state of mind. My plants have thrived regardless of mourning, anger, happiness and rage. Provided they are given what is needed.

        The rest is mystical wonders and not science. You can believe whatever floats your boat, and things may be true that remain to be proven, but that doesn’t mean that everyone should buy into the existence of unicorns because no one has proven that they don’t exist.

        “As Stanford University professor Emeritus William Tiller (also featured in What the Bleep) pointed out after the film’s release,[4] it is extremely easy to manipulate the crystalline structure of water, especially by adding contaminants or tinkering with the cooling rate of the water. In Dr. Tiller’s words, “In Dr. Emoto’s experiments, [supercooling] was neither controlled nor measured, a necessary requirement to be fulfilled if one wanted to prove that it was the new factor of specific human intention that was causative.”[5] Apparently, Emoto’s experimental protocols are so lacking as to be unrepeatable, and even the most basic attempts at scientific controls are absent. Regular Skeptical Inquirer contributor Harriet Hall reviewed Emoto’s book about his experiments herself, giving it the honor of “the worst book I have ever read. It is about as scientific as Alice in Wonderland.http://www.csicop.org/specialarticles/show/a_grain_of_truth_recreating_dr._emotos_rice_experiment/#_ftn4

      • Mingy says:

        I’ve got to get me some Tulsi tea.

    • Adrien says:

      Wasn’t there a mythbuster episode for this plant thing? I forgot the result of that experiment.

    • Jay says:

      Plants are living organisms and absolutely do respond to stimuli. Many plants are phototropic (sense and grow toward light) and gravitropic (sense when they’re upside down and turn to grow upward). There are also biochemical pathways in plants that lead to plant “memory.”

      Water is not living and thus does not respond to these stimuli. Not sure how anyone can compare plants to water.

      • teatimescoming says:

        Plants are living organisms that require those stimuli to remain alive. Water is a molecule; it has no “alive” or “dead” and therefore no response to emotional stimuli, or anything, really, outside of heat or cold, and polar bodies affecting their hydrogen bonds.

      • frivolity says:

        Exactly. Plants do not to these ethereal “energies” as Goop and this opportunist hack Emoto describe. They respond to actual physical stimuli.

        Nature has a great documentary about plant response:
        http://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/episodes/what-plants-talk-about/video-full-episode/8243/
        Plants are absolutely fascinating!

        Water is also fascinating, but it is an inorganic molecule, not an organism!

      • Kiddo says:

        @frivolity, That was a great show.

      • Hmmm says:

        Water is very much alive! Its full of microbes, tiny crab fish and tons of other living organisms. But this doesn’t proof this quack’s theory!

    • Bucky says:

      I cannot when people start talking about “energies.” My father and sister are both legit scientists, and I love when they respond to these “energies” folks with, “Please, elaborate. What are these energies?” And not a soul can articulate what they mean in a logical way, because it’s all bullshit.

      Yes, energy is a real thing, obviously. By all means, take a refresher physics course and go to town on the nature of energy. But that is not what these loons are talking about.

      A story pops up every day now I feel like where I’m like, “Man, I wish more celebs had gone to school OR had the good sense to say, ‘I’m not well versed on this topic, so I’ll pass, I’m sure plenty of others can speak on it more intelligently than I can,’.”

      • mimif says:

        I’m going to chime in and write that perhaps “energies” is a misleading term. Plants have complex hormones that can be manipulated, as well as an intimate relationship with mycelium in the right environment. Between their own hormones and the surrounding mycelial network, plants actually can communicate with each other. It’s really fascinating and while it just may be cellular communication, there is definitely some “energy” happening there.
        But what do I know? I’m just a farmer and stuff.

      • Kiddo says:

        I think their ‘energies’ had to do with complex human emotion or some other thingy.

        Are you off the fields today because of rain?

      • mimif says:

        Oh yeah I get the human projection thing, I was just geeking out on plants and how they are so much more complex than most people give them credit for.
        I worked til 10 last night (with a headlamp) and I’m fried. Being a lazy ass this morning and it’s already as hot as Franco’s undies outside.

      • Kiddo says:

        Haha, the headlamp visual is *amazingly* amusing.

      • Bucky says:

        @mimif Yes, you’re entirely correct in that. It’s basic science. I’m not talking about that, I’m talking about people who think they can, like, transfer “energies” with their thoughts, or feelings. And who think “energies” are at work around us, like spirits or something. NOPE NOPE NOPE.

        You know when you transfer energy? When you move something. I’m transferring energy to my keyboard right now with my fingers.

      • lrm says:

        Too bad you cannot prove that spirits ‘aren’t’ around plants, either, Bucky. I understand that the concept riles you up, but when you say ‘it’s basic science’ about plants’ complex systems, remember that this wasn’t ‘basic science’ that long ago. Science evolves, and while people have taken the concept of ‘energies’ and diluted it to fit a simplistic worldview, this doesn’t mean that you can ‘prove’ the opposite, either. I’m just saying that simply b/c conventional wisdom [er, science] and its instruments do not prove that something exists, does not mean it doesn’t exist, categorically.

        I take the philosophical view on most things-I realize that tends to make subjects go round and round in circles, but I find that it also leaves room for potential-such as what science has yet to discover but surely will in the near future. I understand there are delusions and watered down, new age superficial interpretations, but I don’t throw the baby out with the bath water.

        Just think: What we think is real and fact and ‘logical’ now, is likely to be considered primitive and even ignorant/ridiculous, several generations from now. I take comfort in that, b/c the science of the day somehow always has the folks of a given era thinking that they are evolved and looking back at the ‘backward thinking of an era’ as something that only happened in the past. Or, we think that whole ‘the world is round’ persecution that occurred as being an isolated incident. Yet, time and again we have seen new ideas and concepts being shunned or ridiculed b/c they don’t fit the norm. Separating the wheat from the chaffe is the challenge though, b/c surely there have been and are many ideas that truly are not worth our time and energy.

      • Kiddo says:

        @lrm, I just hope this ‘open to all possibilities’ philosophy is limited in terms of RX for cancer, ingredients for sunscreen, and so on. Snakeoil salesmanship has a long storied history, same with magicians and those gifted with slight of hand.

      • Bucky says:

        Irm, I am perfectly fine with people believing in spirits, god/s, whatever you feel like calling it. I do not like it when people conflate legitimate science and personal beliefs. I am also well aware that what we know now will seem primitive someday; change is the only constant, as the saying goes.

        However, that has nothing to do with basic, provable mechanisms. Like, do people not take basic science classes anymore? I don’t get it.

        We have a very good way of separating the wheat from the chaffe. It’s called the scientific method. Also, I don’t think “philosophical” is quite the word to describe your world view.

      • Mel says:

        @IRM – yours was the most rational and balanced posts on this thread. The scientific method may go a great distance towards preventing confirmation bias, it doesn’t completely eliminate human fallacy. How scientists choose and frame hypotheses and what they choose to observe and measure are not uninformed by their own preconceived notions, biases and personal histories.

        Humans really want certainty more than they want truth, hence the vice grip that both religion and science have on many people’s belief systems. Personally, if I had to choose absolute faith and certainty in one camp, I would choose science. But I am just as wary and weary of the dogma and close-mindedness of that camp as the former. Here is a bit scientific certainty for ya:

        “The demonstration that no possible combination of known substances, known forms of machinery and known forms of force, can be united in a practical machine by which man shall fly long distances through the air, seems to the writer as complete as it is possible for the demonstration of any physical fact to be.” — Simon Newcomb, professor of mathematics and astronomy at Johns Hopkins University, 1906

        I am sure if there had been an Internet then, the Wright Brothers would have been pilloried as magical thinking idiots

        So, the bath water of science may be much cleaner than that of the New Agers’, but you can still lose the baby in it.

        All that said, unless someone formally repeats the water crystal thing, it seems sufficiently debunked. However, none of us (including scientists) know what we don’t know, so I won’t call anyone an idiot for entertaining the notion.

  11. AureliaKai says:

    No, Goop, if molecular structure could have been affected by strong energy then your mouth would have disappeared ages ago through the collective will of us plebians projecting it.

    • Charlotte says:

      No, don’t close her mouth; hit her where is really hurts and plug her butt instead. Where would she be without her precious goop poop??

      • AureliaKai says:

        True, but would be our luck she would become a breatharian and we would never hear the end of it.

  12. booboobird says:

    Well, since human body consists of a lot of water, I can see how a negative mindset could impact your overall wellbeing. I’ve known about Emoto for a few years and he makes sense
    the funny thing is, all these things that G talks about have been known forever, how come she’s into it only now?

    • Lollipop says:

      How on Earth does it make sense? How? It does not make any sense.

      • SpookySpooks says:

        Exactly.
        And you know how great of a scientist he is when he writes coffee table books.

      • Hannah says:

        yep

      • booboobird says:

        Sorry, he makes sense TO ME. I also think that law of attraction works. I’m new age like that.
        But I still do not like GP whether she yells at her waterglass, pulls oil or does rainbow enema.

      • Mel says:

        It makes perfect sense if you consider the possibility – and it is a very real one – that information is non-local, and that consciousness is all-pervading.
        In fact, most of modern quantum physics is based on the first of these premises (with many true scientists considering the second one).

    • cr says:

      He may make sense to you, but he’s no scientist and has not offered any evidence to back up his claims:

      ” Very clever. He’s also pretty clever in that he’s never done a blinded study to show that words like love cause beautiful crystals to form, while negative words either fail to cause crystals to form or result in ugly crystals. As Skeptico pointed out:

      The third example was the work of Masura Emoto, who tapes words to bottles of water. The water is chilled and forms into crystals descriptive of the words used. For example, if the word “love” is taped to a bottle, beautiful crystals form; if the words “you make me sick” are used, ugly images appear. These experiments have not been performed to a scientific protocol and have never been independently replicated.”

      http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2006/10/06/your-friday-dose-of-woo-h2ooooooommmm-1/

      A [real] scientist would have checked to see if he got the same results if he didn’t know beforehand which water was clean. Emoto never bothered with even this most elementary double-check. He didn’t consult real scientists. Had he done so, they could have told him that these snowflake crystals, just like raindrops, form around a core of dust, so actually the cleaner water is less likely to form them. Their beauty varies with the temperature and conditions of formation, not with the purity of the water. The idea that snowflakes could show anything about differences in the “molecular structure” of water is incompatible with basic physics.
      http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/1144934/masaru_emotos_wonderful_world_of_water/

    • lana86 says:

      It might “make sense” in the context of a kitchen discussion of two bored housewifes, but it is NOT scientific.

      “After the lengthy review of Emoto’s research methods and results, I have come to believe that Dr. Emoto is offering pseudoscience to the masses in the guise of defensible research. Only time and review by others will tell if there is any truth at the heart of Mr. Emoto’s claims, as Emoto himself thoroughly believes in his findings but does not value the scientific method or community. What is truly fearsome is the great numbers of people that accept his words as proven facts without looking deeper to find out if his claims are truly justified. “

    • Belle Epoch says:

      I’m with booboobird – Emoto has been talking about this stuff for at least a decade so she is VERY late to the party. This hardly makes her look cutting edge or deep. Did someone give her the “coffee table book” so now the theory is VBG – Verified By Goop?

    • annaloo. says:

      Water (happy, sad or angry) is not the only thing affecting someone’s psyche. There are so many factors, psychologically hypnotized water alone isn’t going to make everything better.

      All this STUFF Gwyneth is buying into– the simplest thing she could do – help others- would give her more spiritual uplift than any report on water.

    • Bob Loblaw says:

      You can believe whatever you like but don’t call it science unless it is a product of the scientific method.

  13. PunkyMomma says:

    I’ve got some magic beans to sell her. . .

    • Krista says:

      And a bridge in Booklyn!

      • mimif says:

        Really? I have an organic ethically & sustainable bamboo silk cami slip in size zero I’d like to sell her for $4200. (NWT)

      • Kiddo says:

        @mimif, but is it invisible to the lowly peasants? That could definitely work, although you are going very low on the retail number.

      • mimif says:

        You are misinformed. It was originally marked at $1200 but I upped it 300% (? I’m horrible at math) because it comes wrapped in paper made from my feng shui apple orchard and a DVD on how to get that stripper’s ass you’ve always wanted.

  14. Jaderu says:

    Reminds me of the Ghostbusters yelling at the pink slime then playing Jackie Wilson for it. And of course Egon slept with it. I wonder if Goopy sleeps with her water?

  15. SpookySpooks says:

    I can’t believe I just read that. Katie Price in her rainbow costume seems like a rocket scientist compared to this.

    • Lollipop says:

      Her and that Woodley girl would be a match made in heaven. Ot hell.

      • Bucky says:

        God, that would be an insufferable duo. I’m suddenly grateful to be a lowly plebe, because if I for any reason were forced to spend time with those two, I’d find a precipice to jump from.

  16. Serenity now says:

    What a dumb bitch. She has hit rock bottom and has started to dig.

    • Frida_K says:

      With a titanium spoon forged within the encircling power of a thousand unicorns’ tears and songs from the souls of a field full of organic kale.

      Could it be other for such a marvel as Goopy Paltrow?

  17. Hmmm says:

    Sometimes I think she sits at home and thinks “what else can I do to infuriate the masses”

    I can understand she promotes conscious uncoupling, because its just nicer to break up in a friendly way, but if she really thinks this quack is worth more than a laugh she desperately needs a reality check. Maybe she is just one of those idiots who still watches Oprah, who is known to shill pseudo babble stuff. Please Goopy, just NO!!!

  18. Laura says:

    So why then.. When I give so much love and positivity to the molecules in wine.. Are they so mean to me and keen to make me very unwell after consumption?

    You’re full of shit goop.

  19. imani says:

    ok lets give a comparison of molecular size compared to you know, things we see. A speck of dust is an approximate halfway in size between an atom and the size of the earth. This dim as a penny candle idiot has no idea what she is talking about.
    Can we stop making people feel able to make statements about science just because they are pretty or famous?
    It makes me both want to giggle and cry.

  20. L says:

    She’s a chemist now?

    • Rhiley says:

      Ha!

      Yeah, I am surprised this mess didn’t begin, “Harvey once begged me to play the role of the brilliant Marie Curie. He assured me that nobody except myself would be able to pull of the role. This was right after I won the Oscar for Shakespeare in Love. And while I declined, my love of chemistry, which developed in the kitchen while cooking with father, lives on.”

  21. Lucy2 says:

    …and that study’s results have been pretty much completely debunked by other scientists.

    I feel like her extent of research on a topic is “hey that sounds neat.”

  22. lana86 says:

    “This author freely admits that he picked and chose particular crystals that fit his own definition of “beautiful” and even admits that isn’t scientific. He then goes off into a digression about how science really isn’t that sure of anything in the first place, erroneously invoking Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle.

    The crystals are simply random. That’s all there is to it. Are they affected by “the personality and thought of the photographer”? Only in one very important way: Due to personality and thought, the photographer selects certain crystals and ignores others, from an initial collection that is totally random. As Emoto says, “the whim of the person doing the selecting certainly comes into play” and “I admit that the selection process is not strictly in accordance with the scientific method, but..”

    It’s always convenient to invoke science to buttress pleasant ideas. In the water case, the bottom line is “be positive and the world will be happy.” It may be true that positive thoughts help make a better planet, but it’s not because those thoughts affect water.

    Read more at http://www.beliefnet.com/News/Science-Religion/2006/03/Sensitive-Water-Science-Or-Fantasy.aspx#L9FQPMxJhkxZxLf4.99

  23. Azurea says:

    There is a lot of science which has been suppressed. Read The Source Field Investigations, by David Wilcock, for a comprehensive description & study of this science.

    • cr says:

      This man?
      “Wilcock co-authored (along with Wynn Free) the book The Reincarnation of Edgar Cayce?[2] in 2004. He is also the author of the 2011 book The Source Field Investigations,[3] which debuted at #18 on the The New York Times Best Seller list on September 11, 2011.[4] Wilcock’s second book, The Synchronicity Key, debuted at #8 on the New York Times Bestseller List on September 4, 2013.[5]

      Wilcock has appeared on several radio programs, including semi-regular appearances on Coast to Coast AM, and he had a role in the Syfy documentary 2012.[citation needed] He was a proponent of the theory that a large segment of humanity would undergo ascension in the year 2012.[citation needed] He also appeared in several episodes of the History Channel series Ancient Aliens.[6]”

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Wilcock

      He is not a scientist, and this stuff isn’t science.

      • dcypher1 says:

        You don’t have to be a scientist to know science.

      • siri says:

        Science, first and foremost, means being open to new ideas, and different ways of thinking. We would never experience progress if there weren’t people who were willing to think outside of boxes, being ridiculed first, only to find out later they were correct. We would still think the sun circles the earth. There’s no absolute right or wrong, just in our minds. Many things are also not provable with the known methods- but they are there nonetheless. Thoughts, emotions etc. are forms of energy like everything else in our universe. You sure know you have them- but how do you prove their existence? Perhaps it would be a good idea to be less judgmental, and more open-minded, because that’s when progress is made.

    • Mel says:

      “Science, first and foremost, means being open to new ideas, and different ways of thinking.”

      Amen.
      Sad to think that one of the last prominent TRUE scientists of the kind was… Isaac Newton (whose less positivist, “esoteric” facets are regularly suppressed or brushed aside today).

  24. GoodNamesAllTaken says:

    So don’t yell at your water? Who yells at their water? Why… Ugh.

  25. Rose says:

    She is a perfect example of the placebo effect.

  26. Jenny says:

    Paltrow probably thinks ppl In Africa should start being nicer to the water so it’s clean to drink

    • Lee says:

      Ha! Exactly! Like the craptastic snake oil “The Secret,” this hokum is so clearly aimed at the comfortably off Westerner with too much time on their hands. Goopy should go to Africa or India like La Jolie and try whispering sweet nothings to the water over there, in the presence of those dying of contaminated water-related diseases. She could save the world.

  27. Rando says:

    Ok I usually am a GP apologist but this is ridiculous.

    • Dinah says:

      Well, admitting you have a problem is the first step to recovery… 😉

      • denisemich says:

        Being a celebrity is not the same as being smart.

        Why do we let celebrities, people who are not usually good at school, tell us what is important?

        Gwen is pretty and thin but she is not a scholar.

  28. Jen2 says:

    Must be the same science that says the earth is flat and is only 6000 years old. Does her “scientist” friend realize that if you change the molecular structure of water it is no longer water–it might still be liquid, but not water. H 2 O is water H 2 O 2 (or other iterations) is something else and I don’t think you want to drink it or bathe in it. I think I will stick to getting my science from DR. Neil DeGrasse Tyson and leave the new age stuff (be it unconscious coupling) to Ms. Paltrow and her new buddies. And I fear for the education of her children if this is what they get at home.

  29. bluhare says:

    I think he’s getting his science mixed up. Quantum physics has different rules, and in the sub atomic world the laws of physics don’t apply like they do in the atomic world.

    I think he’s taking that and trying to make it play in Peoria.

  30. Celia says:

    I kind of want her and Shailene to co-write a lifestyle advice book although I’m not sure the universe is ready for it…

    • Dinah says:

      I think that would end in a major shit- slinging war as they escalate the struggle to out- pretentious and out-bullshit each other. Might even be entertaining in its spectacle.

  31. Toniko says:

    For someone so “rich and trendy”, she has such a cheap yellow tone of the hair.

  32. Eleonor says:

    This woman needs an education.

  33. Ag says:

    not clear why you’re reluctant to call this what it is – pseudo-science. that only lends a sliver of legitimacy to such nonsense.

  34. eliza says:

    Sounds like an episode of Full Metal Alchemist, my favorite cartoon.

  35. Matty says:

    She’s lost the plot.

  36. daisyfly says:

    Blythe! Come and get your child!

  37. Annaloo. says:

    Gwyneth is a poster child for why America comes in 35th in the world for science.. people buy this crap like what “Dr” Emoto is shilling. I saw “What the Bleep do we Know” several years ago. While it’s a good new age theory for positivity, Emoto’s optimistic studies have not been published in any reputable science magazine or medical journal.

    Mindy Kaling had a quote last week that was very good: We should stop listening to what celebrities say. Gwyneth Paltrow is not a nutritionist, has never studied physical therapy academically, nor is she anywhere close to being a scientist (I don’t think she has even a basic understanding of biology) — how she has been given a platform to speak on things that affect the health of people BOGGLES me, and can only reflect on the lemmings that follow her. (The woman DOES have best selling books and a business relationship with Tracy ANderson — SOMEONE is buying this stuff! ) Everyone is affected differently physiologically, genetically and environmentally by diet, exercise and chemical exposure. How she is speaking on physiological and psychological effects on the human body is BEYOND ME.

    This woman couldn’t even make it into college on her own. USC only happened bc of a letter from Michael Douglas. For the month she was there, I don’t think she there enrolled under a biochemistry major or bothered to study any life science. Now there’s perspective for you.

  38. videli says:

    Hahaha – who needs internet trolls when you’re your own troll?

  39. FingerBinger says:

    Every time this woman opens her mouth people jump down her throat. Gwyneth is a new age hippy who thinks she has the answers to life. Who cares? If this is what she believes I say let her.

    • TheOriginalKitten says:

      Yeah… I see no harm in this. It’s not like she’s telling other people to believe in what she believes in.
      I assume that people who follow her website have a genuine interest in New Age-related things so she’s really just speaking to that audience.
      *shrugs*

    • Kiddo says:

      She’s fun to goof on, even without malice.

    • Kate2 says:

      Exactly. She’s not saying “I think everyone should get on board with this”, she’s just saying this fascinates her. I don’t agree with her but that’s ok, she’s entitled to believe whatever she wants, be fascinated by whatever she wants and blog about whatever she wants. I subscribe to goop because I think its hilarious to see what totally out of my price range shit she’s peddling. I saw this edition come into my mailbox last week and I saw the remark about this negative energy or whatever. I blew it off cause its not my deal and didn’t think another thing about it until it started showing up on celebrity sites.

      I just think people are overreacting to this and to her in general. She’s an insufferable, out of touch hippie. Big hairy deal. (Not that there’s generally anything wrong with being a hippie 🙂 )

  40. Sumeria says:

    I know everyone loves to rag on her, but this time she in not just talking around the stick up her ass. Not only is she right, but her thoughts are not original. If she is making it seem like these are her thoughts, then she is plagiarizing. For those interested in what is behind what she is talking about, see the movie What the Bleep Do We Know. This docudrama actually depicts how words change water molecules. While I do not claim to buy into everything the movie suggests, I will say it was enough to show me there is still so much we do not know or understand. Don’t let the messenger cause you to miss the message.

  41. The Original G says:

    This explains so much. She’s drinking Stupid Water.

    Maybe there’s an endorsement deal here somewhere?

    Or maybe she has no one else to talk to these days.

    • annaloo. says:

      Haha! If water truly can absorb our qualities, then what’s to stop it from absorbing stupidity? Nice point.

  42. Nothing wrong with other ideas says:

    This idea is nothing new and plenty of people are interested in it as a concept. Gwyneth is very “new-agey”. Nothing wrong with it, but she always comes to the party late. We all have known about this book for ages. There is a lot more at work in the universe than celebs and celeb culture. Most people don’t bother to read a book or investigate all the wonderful things at work in the world. It’s their loss. Gwyneth will only be attacked so long as she thinks its her job to communicate ideas to people who have no interest in or understanding of what she’s talking about. As for the rest of us, everything she talks about is “been there, done that.”

  43. eribra says:

    I have a friend who believes in the energy of things- live things- and the energy of our thoughts especially- but also feng shui and the things that block positive energy, promote positive energy, specific cures for difficulties in your life etc. She is pretty far out there but coming from a place of genuine desire to make the world a better place. Even she- one who is willing to consider the most outlandish ideas in the search for health and happiness laughs at this. Water is water-drink it, bathe in in, keep your toilet seat down, keep it out of the bedroom- but you don’t have to be nice to it.

    • lrm says:

      It’s not really about being ‘nice’ in human terms. Nor emotion. It’s vibration. And vibration does affect living structures-including humans. Music/sound/vibration/tone….=emotions contain tone and, hence, vibration. Vibration is a wavelength=energy.

  44. Mzizkrizten says:

    If I’m really nice to chocolate before I eat it maybe I won’t get fat?

  45. Nonny says:

    She’s so dumb she goes to the gym when she could just, like, get lipo or something.

    • Nighty says:

      Going to the gym is better than doing a lipo…. lipo just takes out the fat, gym improves your vascular system, increases your muscles, improves your lungs capacity to breath, relaxes you…. etc…

    • Hissyfit says:

      Lol for the white chicks reference!

    • dasarih says:

      I think she meant the “She’s so dumb she goes to the gym when she could just, like, get lipo or something.” quote. It’s a line from the movie White Chicks.

      • Nighty says:

        Oh… never seen that movie… But by the title.. probably not worth my time…

  46. Nighty says:

    I just have one comment to make on this “thing-y” that the way you treat water, makes it change its molecules:

    “Two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I am not yet completely sure about the universe.”

    (attributed to Einstein; but no one knows for sure…)

  47. Chicagogurl says:

    we had this bullsh$t career coach come into work for a team building event and speak about this “philosophy” for over an hour and shows slides and samples…..when I told my co-worker that it sounded like a bunch of hippie horse apples, she said, “You should really put down your bottled water when you speak like that”. I lost it and had to be excused.

  48. annaloo. says:

    Some people in this world can’t even get clean water, much less worry about it being happy or sad water.

    *sigh*

    Gwyneth could do her reputation a lot of good if she focused her celebrity for things like that: real, urgent and fixable issues- than puff vanity, pseudo-spiritiuality and overpriced shot glasses. I imagine she’d get more of this elusive positivity she seems to be terminally after if she did charity rather than curating the expensive and exclusive to the masses who could give a shit less.

    • frivolity says:

      Amen.

    • Emily C. says:

      The people who are really into this stuff, like Goop, care desperately about their own health and lives. They don’t care about how they could actually make the world a better place. Their lives are already practically perfect in every way — all they care about is how to improve themselves. When stuff that actually works is out, because change is hard, they resort to this stupidity. I think they honestly *cannot* see outside their own constricted, strangled little world. And that’s sad for them, but worse for the world. Goop could do so much good with her money and fame, but she’d rather shill for con artists.

  49. Mitch Buchanan Rocks! says:

    With her vegan lifestyle it would be great if, instead of focusing on Molecules, that goop would focus her energies on stopping the practice of factory farming – each and every one of those animals on a factory farm in inhumane conditions has feelings and a soul.

  50. Jayna says:

    Man, did Ben Affleck dodge a bullet with her.

  51. Mean Hannah says:

    She has too much money and time on her hands. She reminds me of a lot of “new money” I knew growing up. These people came from really poor- to modest- to comfortably middle-class upbringing but through hard work and or luck, became very rich. At first, they do the usual: buy real estate, send kids to expensive schools, buy nice things. They pick up a new hobby or two, spend a lot of money on exclusive memberships, country clubs, treatments at salons and spas. But sooner or later, they all seem to become obsessed with health.

    It starts with gym membership, private chefs, fancy doctors and nutritionists. Then it’s mainstream holistic stuff, like acupuncture, herbalists, cupping, etc. Soon, it become all about spirituality and how they are now so much more enlightened than the rest if the general (poor) public obsessed with materialism. Yoga, chanting, meditation, large donations to church or temples are followed by having their own team of quack doctors, gurus, healers, monks, mystics, etc.

    Before long, they start veering off from rich eccentric to truly crazy. Like a CEO making big business decisions with his guru. Or his wife who brings in a shaman to cleanse their house. Or her friend who thinks her healer can cure a friend’s breast cancer with a raw diet and a healing color- therapy. A family friend who chases UFOs, leaving behind a wife who strains her poo daily and then weighs them.

    Of course, they are all surrounded by their own brand of crazy that they think the others are just poor, jealous, undereducated, and not enlightened.

  52. OhMyMy says:

    That’s nothing new. They talked about it in the movie What the #$*! back in 2004.

  53. Jazzjazz says:

    I seriously believe she has a screw loose. And as far a her GOOP organization I understand it is almost bankrupt. Chris Martin should thank G-d that there is something called divorce. I only hope he gets custody of the children because I am worried about the ideas she is putting into her children’s heads. If this was anyone else I’d say they need to be committed.

  54. EscapedConvent says:

    I just knocked over a bottle of sparkling water & then screamed at it for being clumsy. The bubbles began to look completely different after I yelled at them

    They are now becoming almost sinister, & I am very nervous about what they might be planning to do for revenge.

  55. floridaseaturtle says:

    I am not a huge Goop fan, but am a die-hard CB site & comment section fan. This time I have to defend goopy here, since IMHO, her only real crime this time was her constant tendency to sound pompous on all things. My teenage son showed me this water experiment a couple of years or so ago. It was interesting, even though I questioned some of it myself, wondered about the controlled environments or lack of, etc. What I came away with the results of his experiment, at the time, was not so much how the angry or happy water (lol), affected plants, but more how it would affect a human. Being in an overall grumpy environment would affect a human’s emotions overall, of course, but never thought about the molecular reaction to the human’s water content (about 80% in average adult) until watching the experiment. Just sayin’. I think that is her only crime here, once again, trying to make appearances of an elitist thinker & coffee table book show-off.
    Hey, maybe I am “slow”, or just a busy mom, but I just recently found out how much replacing electrolytes directly affects my moods. I caught the H1N1 Flu in Jan this year, thankfully survived, and was hospitalized for over a month. While all my major organs were recouping in the hospital one day, I had a morning where I was wayyyy moody, almost crying and couldn’t figure out why (beyond the obvious situation at hand). My nurse checked a couple of things, put some magical potion in my IV and I swear my mood elevated to practically giddy within minutes. I asked her what in the heck did you do??? She said “you were low on electrolytes”. I was wowed, because I just never really thought about it past..’I’m hot, sweaty and thirsty, so I should drink Gatorade’ or how important Pedialyte is for babies if they are puking to prevent dehydration. Anyway, sorry for the long Off-Topic & post. I just think we can’t beat each other up too much for pondering things like this, the world is too complicated. But snooty pondering….can not be tolerated…ever! (Throws one of my Xanax at her pic…runs and picks it back up after realizing my boneheaded response and tosses it back with a chug of my iced Frost Gatorade).

  56. Nymeria says:

    This reminds me of “om water”: bottled water that was vibrated at the frequency of “om.” And no, I am not making this up. Where was it sold? San Francisco, naturally.

    I have to be honest, I do wonder about the truth of this; has it any merit? Even if it does, we do the best we can in life with the cards we’re dealt, and negativity is an inescapable part of life. You can do your best to make it as small a part as possible, but no one goes through an entire lifetime free of any and all negativity. Your water molecules will cope.

  57. Camille (The Original) says:

    Good grief!

  58. LAK says:

    We know the components of water. If you changed the structure, it would be something else and you’d see it.

    Basic chemistry 101. Stupid GOOP.

  59. dcypher1 says:

    I know goop thinks she’s so cool for being the first one to tell u this. But its been said before in a movie called what the bleep do you know. Goop is only copying what was said in that movie. She’s not the first to point this out I think in her mind she thinks she’s so smart cus she’s the first one to tell all the peasants this. Girl u ain’t saying nothing knew. I saw that movie 9 years ago.

  60. Spaniard says:

    The worst part is he claims polluted water can be purified with prayers and positivity…

    • Nighty says:

      ??? :O

      *shakes head in astonishment.. wondering how can someone be so stupid as that guy,,,,*

  61. Jaded says:

    Oh….I get it Goop – so when I turn my sprinkler on and it sprays me with ice-cold water all I should do is yell at it and it will be too afraid and shaken up by my verbal battering to ever spray me again and will spray in the opposite direction.

    What kind of expensive tin foil hat have you been wearing lately…..

  62. Ice says:

    I’m open to those mind-over-matter ideas but GP is such a flake! Plus she uses this kind of ‘philosophy’ to justify her narcissism and to convince herself that all negativity (in actuality legitimate criticism) directed toward her is unhealthy and people shouldn’t be so negative. By her world view, however, she should ‘realise’ that she’s attracting it with her own negative thought and feelings. Also, this type of magical thinking is dangerous when taken too far. i.e. Don’t help the poor; they attracted it themselves with their negative thinking. People with AIDS and cancer are just negative thinkers. If only they visualised being cured, they wouldn’t have any diseases. Bottom line: GP is a total flake.

  63. vava says:

    I’m surprised she’s wearing Ray Ban sunglasses – the Wayfarer and the Aviators. Aren’t those rather ‘peasanty’???

  64. Boromir's Bytch says:

    Gwennie is late to the party with this one. Miranda Kerr has been on Dr. Emoto’s bandwagon for a couple of years and incorporated these concepts into her Kora Organics line. As The Beauty Junkies blog explained Miranda had each product feature “a positive word (like joy, empathy, acceptance and compassion) on the bottle, based on the theory of vibrational energy by Dr. Masaru Emoto. It’s believed that positive feelings have the ability to change the molecular structure of an object.” In addition, Kora Organics runs all their liquids thru rose quartz crystals so that of the “vibrations of love” associated with rose quartz can be captured during the production process. Uh-huh.

  65. Liberty says:

    I am going to make water cry, so the earth will never dry out and everyone will have enough.

    I hope it works!!!

  66. Bob Loblaw says:

    She’s dumber than dirt, have I hurt dirt’s feelings?

  67. poppy says:

    this b!tch will buy and try to sell anything.
    anything.

    • Annaloo. says:

      One bottle of positively charged rare earth water to help balance and nourish your inner spirit! Only $40 for a 4 pak!

  68. Truly says:

    All of a sudden.
    Brad Pitt.
    His ExEx.
    G.Paltrow and J.Aniston???
    How aweful and super-duper-ficial these two women are.
    Not every celeb, but, BP’s EXs are amazingly….superficial and shallow.
    What a coincidence.
    Interesting, isn’it?
    Those women’s every single word or curiosity is pathetic…sigh.

  69. Kate2 says:

    So, the new goop came out yesterday. I have to say, there’s an article about artificial sweeteners that’s very helpful. As someone who has made major changes to her diet in the past couple of months, including cutting out as much sugar as possible, it was helpful to read about sugar alternatives. Just saying.

    The ridiculously overpriced clothes were hilarious as usual though.

  70. Emily C. says:

    Please don’t stop yourself short of calling this pseudoscience. It is pseudoscience. It is complete and utter nonsense. And Gwyneth Paltrow is not just an ignoramus. She shills this stuff. She makes money from it. This is worse even than her affluenza.

    I’d also like to see the “evidence” that plants supposedly respond to negative and positive stimuli. If it’s the same “evidence” I have seen, it is bollocks. Plants will tilt toward the sun, but that is a completely different mechanism from anything to do with emotions. Even if we did find evidence that plants had some kind of psychic connection with humans (we won’t), plants are alive. Water is not. It is a thing. You may as well yell at a a rock.

  71. Candice says:

    Gwyneth isn’t the only one who thinks this!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8nIaQWRBQ6E#t=1592