Mu­sic & Na­ture: What do you now see as a link be­tween your ac­tivi­ties and pro­duc­tions in the Mi­cro Mu­sic La­bo­ra­to­ries^® and the phar­ma­ceu­ti­cal in­dus­try?

Peter Hübner: Gen­er­ally speak­ing, the phar­ma­ceu­ti­cal in­dus­try is a part of the chemi­cal in­dus­try to which I owe the abil­ity to manu­fac­ture our prod­ucts. We use mag­netic tapes and CDs as sound car­ri­ers and both are achieve­ments of the chemi­cal in­dus­try.

More im­por­tantly, the chemi­cal in­dus­try has sup­ported me gen­er­ously in my work as a com­poser and re­sear­cher by pro­vid­ing a large num­ber of ex­pen­sive tapes. Es­pe­cially the com­pa­nies AGFA, a "sub­sidi­ary" of Bayer and BASF. I re­ceived this sup­port from the heads of these com­pa­nies and why shouldn`t the re­search which I was able to carry­out with their help, be cred­ited back to them?

Firstly, I feel to­wards these in­dus­tries a natu­ral sense of grati­tude and close­ness, as they have in the past and still to­day sup­port my work – as does the com­puter in­dus­try.

Sec­ondly, if I were to work more closely with them in the fu­ture, I would an­tici­pate them be­ing the most re­lent­less, harsh­est crit­ics of my work, since they would al­ways be look­ing to­wards sci­en­tific meth­od­ol­ogy to achieve ob­jec­tiv­ity.

Thirdly, I be­lieve that phar­ma­ceu­tics will al­ways have ad­van­tages which mu­si­cal struc­tures do not have and that mu­si­cal struc­tures will al­ways have ad­van­tages which chemi­cal struc­tures do not have. And this is pre­cisely why I be­lieve in the ne­ces­sity for a work­able sym­bi­otic re­la­tion­ship.

And fourthly, once my prod­ucts are cre­ated and mu­si­cal struc­tures exist, then they can be du­pli­cated with the help of chemi­cal prod­ucts as sound car­ri­ers (mu­si­cal struc­ture car­ri­ers) just like phar­ma­ceu­ti­cal prod­ucts. This means: the chemi­cal in­dus­try could in prin­ci­ple take over the du­pli­ca­tion and dis­tri­bu­tion of my mu­si­cal prod­ucts – al­beit in close prox­imity to its own prod­ucts.

Mu­sic & Na­ture: So, then you will have the natu­ral heal­ers who have un­til now been on your side against you?

Peter Hübner: As I have said, based on the prin­ci­ple of thought, I am linked with the phar­ma­ceu­ti­cal in­dus­try, in the firm be­lief of suc­cess in the area of medi­cine us­ing ob­jec­tive sci­en­tific meas­ures. And I can­not imag­ine that those work­ing in phar­ma­ceu­tics do not strive for natu­ral­ness in the same way as all natu­ral heal­ing fol­lowers.

But these re­search­ers sub­ject all their work and achieve­ments to the prin­ci­ples of ob­jec­tive sci­ence. I do not be­lieve that they would be op­posed to any natu­ral struc­tur­ing of medi­cal prepa­ra­tions, if this were to be based on ob­jec­tive sci­en­tific cri­te­ria. And in my view, even so called natu­ral medi­cine is only con­sis­tently suc­cess­ful if it is based on this ra­tional, ob­jec­tive sci­en­tific ap­proach. Es­pe­cially Pythagoras, who I refer to for my mu­si­cal work in the field of medi­cine, is rec­og­nised as be­ing the foun­der of natu­ral sci­ence and the move­ment to­wards ob­jec­tive sci­en­tific knowl­edge.

Through the ser­vices of phar­ma­ceu­tics, doc­tors have a great deal of per­sonal power and a part of their suc­cess can be at­trib­uted to phar­ma­ceu­tics. And yet, mod­ern, sci­en­tifi­cally trained medics are at ease with this situa­tion and do not suffer from a loss of per­son­al­ity or in­fe­ri­or­ity com­plexes. They are part of a large, proven, sci­ence-ori­en­tated sys­tem of medi­cal care and are just as in­dis­pen­sa­ble as "medi­cal prepa­ra­tions" and "medi­cal tech­nol­ogy".

Many heal­ers and non-medi­cal prac­ti­tio­ners have never had the chance to be­come part of a suc­cess­ful sys­tem of treat­ment. They carry on for bet­ter or worse, with­out be­ing able to draw on ma­jor ob­jec­tive wide­spread heal­ing suc­cesses and then be­come frus­trated when they don`t find the rec­og­ni­tion they want in their spe­cial­ist field.
I was in­spired and asked, not by these peo­ple, but by the field of medi­cal sci­ence and by lead­ing in­ter­na­tional spe­cial­ists, to look ob­jec­tively at the har­monic laws at play in the mi­cro­cosm of mu­sic and to de­velop these for mod­ern medi­cine.
And it is those very peo­ple who are in­volved in mod­ern sci­en­tific medi­cine who pro­vide the ma­jor­ity of the sup­port for this work from their own com­mit­ment and re­search.
This may also be re­lated to the fact that the pro­fes­sional group of so-called or­tho­dox prac­ti­tio­ners has more "prac­tis­ing" mu­si­cians than any other pro­fes­sional group.

More and more doc­tors are turn­ing to natu­ral meth­ods of treat­ment since with­out doubt, they have seen more harm­ful side ef­fects from phar­ma­ceu­ti­cal prepa­ra­tions than their pa­tients and are re­lieved when they are not re­proached as a re­sult of these prepa­ra­tions hav­ing been pre­vi­ously pre­scribed.
Many are us­ing natu­ral heal­ing meth­ods, per­haps not ex­actly vol­un­tar­ily on ac­count of new knowl­edge, but be­cause they are made to fear that their pa­tients may go else­where. More than 80% of pa­tients to­day pre­fer to see na­tu­ro­paths. Of course, these doc­tors rec­og­nise and pay spe­cial re­gard to my Medi­cal Reso­nance Ther­apy Mu­sic^®.

How­ever, I rarely find a healer or non-medi­cal prac­ti­tio­ner with an open mind to sci­en­tific ob­jec­tiv­ity in natu­ral medi­cine.
It could be viewed that they find the de­mand for ob­jec­tive knowl­edge too taxing or even un­im­por­tant.
Many great think­ers have lik­ened mu­sic to as­tron­omy, as the strong­est ex­pres­sion of mathe­mat­ics. There was a time when mu­si­col­ogy was equated with a sci­en­tific dis­ci­pline of mathe­mat­ics. Pythagoras even ex­pres­sed the view that mu­si­col­ogy rep­re­sented the per­fect point of in­ter­sec­tion be­tween the arts and the sci­ences.

I am to­day re­lat­ing this state­ment be­yond mu­si­col­ogy to phar­ma­col­ogy; in the way that Pythagoras would have. Chem­is­try has evolved as a large, suc­cess­ful area of knowl­edge, and has reached the point of in­te­grat­ing with the har­monic. If this in­te­gra­tion were to take place, it would avoid the un­wanted side ef­fects of its prod­ucts and at the same time, achieve a gen­eral nor­mal­is­ing ef­fect.