From AbundantHope.net

Environment/Science
Exposing the Myth of the GERM THEORY II
By Arthur M. Baker
Aug 26, 2013 - 3:37:29 PM

Exposing the Myth of the GERM THEORY

by Arthur M. Baker

PASTEUR'S GERM THEORY OF DISEASE CAUSATION

In 1864, French chemist Louis Pasteur fathered "The Science of Bacteriology" and "The Germ

Theory of Disease Causation" by demonstrating the existence of various micro-organisms—

and concluding that these germs cause pathogenic changes in living cultures within the

laboratory setting.

The germ theory states that diseases are due solely to invasion by specific aggressive microorganisms.

A specific germ is responsible for each disease, and micro-organisms are capable

of reproduction and transportation outside of the body.

With the germ theory of disease, no longer did we have to take responsibility for sickness

caused by our own transgressions of the laws of health. Instead, we blamed germs that invaded

the body.

The germ theory effectively shifted our personal responsibility for health and well-being

onto the shoulders of the medical profession who supposedly knew how to kill off the

offending germs. Our own personal health slipped from our control.

Almost everyone in the Western world has been nurtured on the germ theory of disease:

that disease is the direct consequence of the work of some outside agent, be it germ or virus.

People have been educated to be terrified of bacteria and to believe implicitly in the idea of

contagion: that specific, malevolently-aggressive disease germs pass from one host to another.

They also have been programmed to believe that healing requires some powerful force to

remove whatever is at fault. In their view, illness is hardly their own doing.

The 'germ era' helped usher in the decline of hygienic health reform in the 19th century and,

ironically, the people also found a soothing complacency in placing the blame for their ill

health on malevolent, microscopic 'invaders', rather than facing responsibility for their own

insalubrious lifestyle habits and their own suffering.

Pasteur was a chemist and physicist and knew very little about biological processes. He was

a respected, influential and charismatic man, however, whose phobic fear of infection and

belief in the "malignancy and belligerence" of germs had popular far-reaching consequences

in the scientific community which was convinced of the threat of the microbe to man. Thus

was born the fear of germs (bacteriophobia), which still exists today. Before the discoveries of

Pasteur, medical science was a disorganised medley of diversified diseases with imaginary

causes, each treated symptomatically rather than at their root cause. Up to this time, the

evolution of medical thought had its roots in ancient shamanism, superstition and religion, of

invading entities and spirits. The profession searched in vain for a tangible basis on which to

base its theories and practices. Pasteur then gave the profession the "germ".

By the 1870s, the medical profession fully adopted the germ theory with a vengeance that

continues today. The advent of the microscope made it possible to see, differentiate and

categorise the organisms. Invading microbes were now seen as the cause of disease.

The medical-pharmaceutical industry began their relentless search for the perfect drug to

combat each disease-causing microbe—of which there are now over 10,000 distinct diseases

recognised by the American Medical Association.

The universal acceptance of the germ theory and widespread bacteriophobia resulted in

frenzied efforts to avoid the threat of germs. A whole new era of modem medicine was then

inaugurated, including sterilisation, pasteurisation, vaccination, and fear of eating raw food.

Medical authorities advised the public to cook all food thoroughly and to boil water.

With [he deprivation of raw foods, an inevitable deterioration of

health ensued.

The practice of killing germs with drugs was also initiated,

resulting in iatrogenic (medically-induced) disease and further

degeneration of health. Various programmes were instituted to

confer 'immunity' against specific germs by way of vaccines and

serums, with horrendous effects.

Fortunately, the horror of consuming raw food as being dangerous

and bacteria-ridden has largely been overcome, although the ban on

unpasteurised dairy foods still exists in most of this country [USA].

And the acceptance of poisonous drugs and inoculations has not

waned to any appreciable extent.

Pasteur Not the Originator of the "Germ Theory"

Actually, the first "Germ Theory of Infectious Disease" was

published in 1762 (almost 100 years prior to Pasteur's theory) by a

Viennese physician, Dr M. A. Plenciz. In 1860, Louis Pasteur took

the credit for the experiments and theory and became identified as

its originator. Read the books, Pasteur: Plagiarist, Impostor, by R.

B. Pearson, and Bechamp or Pasteur? A Lost Chapter in the History

of Biology by Douglas E. Hume, for all the details.

Claude Bernard (1813-1878) disputed the validity of the germ

theory and maintained that the general condition of the body is the

principal factor in disease, but this idea was largely ignored by the

medical profession and the general public. Bernard and Pasteur had

many debates on the relative importance of the microbe and the

internal environment in which they thrive.

Pasteur Realises Mistake

Around 1880, Pasteur himself admitted

his mistake. According to Dr Duclaux

(one of Pasteur's co-workers), Pasteur

discovered that microbial species can

undergo many transformations. These

facts were not consistent with his germ

theory and destroyed its very basis.

It is frequently overlooked that around

1880, Pasteur changed his theory.

According to Dr Duclaux, Pasteur stated

that germs were "ordinarily kept within

bounds by natural laws, but when

conditions change, when its virulence is

exalted, when its host is enfeebled, the

germ is able to invade the territory which

was previously barred to it." This is the premise that a healthy body

is resistant and not susceptible to disease.

With the advent of Pasteur's mysterious germ, however, medicine

cloaked itself under the guise of 'science' and ever since has

succeeded in keeping the public ignorant of the true nature of disease.

BACTERIA AND THEIR SYMBIOTIC ROLE IN THE

BODY

Bacteria are our symbiotic partners in life and are completely

normal to the body. They work symbiotically with the host organism

by assisting in the breakdown and removal of toxic materials

and in creating nutrients that are vital to our welfare.

Lactobacillus acidophilus, Lactobacillus bifidus and coli bacteria

are normally present in the human digestive tract and are sometimes

called "friendly, beneficial or symbiotic intestinal flora". They are

necessary within the body for the proper absorption and

utilisation of food particles; for aiding in cellular nourishment; for

stimulating peristalsis; for detoxifying and creating soft, smooth

stools; and for keeping down pathogenic germs. (Antibiotics

destroy these forms of useful bacteria).

Bacteria and micro-organisms also form a vital part in the world's

food chain. When organic matter within plants and animals

decomposes throughout nature, bacteria and moulds of the Monera

family disorganise the highly complex organic molecules into

simple inorganic wastes—whose elements are excreted back into

the soil to be taken up once again as food by plants, and reorganised

via the process of photosynthesis into widely diverse forms

of vegetable matter, including food for humans, such as fruits, nuts,

and seeds.

Bacteria are actually primitive forms of life which subsist on

scavenging dead organic material. They break up and decompose

waste material in our system just as they do within the plant and

animal kingdoms.

Bacterial action renders some waste-matters usable in our body

that would ordinarily be expelled and, as such, bacteria are essential

to our lives—without them, our existence would not be possible. As

intestinal flora, for instance, bacteria are a much needed symbiotic

partner in life, responsible for synthesising vitamin B 12 and

vitamin K within our body.

Our body carries about a five-year supply of vitamin B12, and

receives a constantly refurnished supply from bacterial activity in

the lower intestine, just as is the case with other primates and

natural plant-eating animals, including

man. Also, vitamin K does not need to be

supplied by food since bacteria which

live symbiotically in the human intestine

are capable of producing this nutrient,

which is required for normal functioning

of the body's blood-clotting agents.

The Beneficial Role of Bacteria in

Disease

As a cause of disease, bacteria do not

'invade' the body—for they are already

present in the digestive tract (which, by

the way, technically is considered outside

the body proper). As needed, bacteria are

brought into the circulatory system to aid

in the process of purging the physiology

of accumulated wastes.

When the body creates a highly localised toxic condition in the

system, as occurs during inflammation, the body absorbs bacteria

from the intestines and/or other body cavities and transports them

to where the accumulated poisons have been concentrated.

During the inflammatory process, pus is formed from the aggregate

of dead cells and from the healing, white blood cell activity

that takes place; and bacteria proliferate to feast on and process this

material which makes it easier for the body to expel.

In this way, bacteria symbiotically assist in breaking down these

toxic materials for elimination. In the process, however, the excreta

of bacteria generated therein is toxic. The bacteria's own excretion

reflects the morbidity of the toxins they consume, in that these

wastes are also highly virulent. If not eliminated from the body,

these accumulate to such an extent that the body initiates a

cleansing/healing crisis.

Bacteria do not produce disease but are useful organisms that

help decompose dead cellular material when the body's cells have

completed their normal life cycle.

This process helps eliminate the dead matter from the body and,

likewise, the bacteria aid in clearing toxic substances. This is why

they are seen regularly during the disease/purification process since

these processes require the disintegration of accumulated poisonous

refuse which the system is endeavouring to purge.

Bacteria do not cause the death of the organic matter on

which they act, however, as they are a part of the result of disease,

not its cause.

Bacteria and germs play an important role in the evolution of

disease but are not fundamental causes as commonly believed.

Bacteria are intimately associated with serious illness, but merely

contribute secondary or tertiary complicating factors by elaborating

certain powerful toxins already present in the toxic body due to the

poisonous by-products of their own fermentative and putrefactive

actions.

Lactic acid, acetic acid (vinegar), alcohol from the fermentation

process; and ammonias, indoles, skatols and purines, etc., from the

putrefaction process are toxic—although our body, under normal

conditions of health, can easily eliminate these forms of bacterial

excreta. In fact, our faeces and urine are loaded with these protein

decomposition by-products from both

bacterial activity and our own body

metabolism.

Bacteria need nourishment to grow and

reproduce. When there is a dangerous

accumulation of waste materials which is

threatening body integrity, our symbiotic

bacteria go into action and perform their

organic matter, that they cause its death is erroneous.

When toxicosis exists and threatens the well-being of the organism,

the body responds by purging the toxins, and disease symptoms

appear. Bacteria are present to decompose metabolic wastes,

toxins, dead cells and tissues and as such are a vitally important part

of the healing process.

Bacteria are capable of only one action in regard to the disease

process: the processing of dead materials as their food. Bacteria

proliferate because there is dead organic matter for them to feed on,

not because they suddenly become malevolent.

In a relatively sterile environment they die due to lack of nourishment,

just as they similarly die off in an environment of their

own creating—namely, in the presence of their own toxic excreta

including lactic acid, acetic acid, alcohol, ammonia and numerous

other protein decomposition by-products.

It is inappropriate to call bacterial activity an 'attack' or an

'invasion' on the part of germs, unless we mean it is an attack

on the toxins. The only real attack that takes place is the one we

make upon our own body as we continually assault ourselves on

the average of some 30 poisoning acts each

day—including the devitalised 'foods' and

'beverages' we consume, the drugs we take,

constantly staying up late and overeating

needlessly—all of which create enervation

and exhaustion of the body.

On the other hand, bacteria cannot thrive in

healthy blood. This is why a clean, wellnourished

body is not subject to their presence.

Living in a germ-free environment is

anitorial/scavenging function of clearing the body of filth and

debris. Afterwards, they resume their passive state once again.

Bacteria have an important role to perform in the vital

process of healing. Germs take part in virtually all disease

phenomena that require the disintegration of refuse and toxic

matter within the body which the system is endeavouring to

remove. They act as scavengers in clearing up the affected area

of toxic saturation. As soon as their role is complete, their

numbers decline.

For this reason once again, bacteria are associated with disease

processes but are not its cause, for bacteria no more cause disease

than flies cause garbage. To assume, because germs are present and

active in the decomposition processes connected with dead

organic matter, that they cause its death is erroneous.

When toxicosis exists and threatens the well-being of the organism,

the body responds by purging the toxins, and disease symptoms

appear. Bacteria are present to decompose metabolic wastes,

toxins, dead cells and tissues and as such are a vitally important part

of the healing process.

Bacteria are capable of only one action in regard to the disease

process: the processing of dead materials as their food. Bacteria

proliferate because there is dead organic matter for them to feed on,

not because they suddenly become malevolent.

In a relatively sterile environment they die due to lack of nourishment,

just as they similarly die off in an environment of their

own creating—namely, in the presence of their own toxic excreta

including lactic acid, acetic acid, alcohol, ammonia and numerous

other protein decomposition by-products.

It is inappropriate to call bacterial activity an 'attack' or an

'invasion' on the part of germs, unless we mean it is an attack

on the toxins. The only real attack that takes place is the one we

make upon our own body as we continually assault ourselves on

the average of some 30 poisoning acts each

day—including the devitalised 'foods' and

'beverages' we consume, the drugs we take,

constantly staying up late and overeating

needlessly—all of which create enervation

and exhaustion of the body.

On the other hand, bacteria cannot thrive in

healthy blood. This is why a clean, wellnourished

body is not subject to their presence.

Living in a germ-free environment is

impossible, however, and not even wholly desirable. Trillions of

bacteria live in our body at all times.

Bacteria Mutate According to Decomposing Soil in the

Environment

There are no 'disease-producing' bacteria, germs, microbes,

bacilli or viruses: it is the environment and the host which determine

disease symptoms and the type of bacteria that proliferate.

Germs do not cause disease; rather, the body generates disease

occasions for the germ proliferation that takes place.

In order for a particular germ to exist, it has to have a suitable

environment created by the toxic and pathological pollution saturating

the body. Systemic poisoning then creates the specific germ

culture, depending upon where the body has accumulated the

wastes and according to the unhealthful lifestyle habits of the

sufferer.

The key point is, however, that it is the diseased toxemic

condition, where the body is overwhelmed with poisonous waste,

which creates an environment favourable to the mutation of bacteria

into those commonly associated with particular diseases. The

disease condition favours proliferation and increasing virulence

until their function of devouring toxic debris is accomplished.

When you ask a bacteriologist what comes first, the soil or the

bacteria, the answer is always the tainted environment, in order for

the bacteria to thrive. Bacteria never exist in a proliferating state

where there is no food or soil for their propagation—but they

multiply rapidly when there is decomposing material to feast on,

and then they die off when there is famine or adversity in their

surroundings.

Once again, bacteria no more create their food supply than flies

cause garbage. The garbage or soiled state within our

body must pre-exist the presence of bacterial 'invasion': bacteria do

not cause disease; they are present because of it.

Bacteriologists themselves wrongly divide the germ population

into specific 'good germs' and 'bad germs' and overlook the fact that

'good germs' have the ability to mutate and proliferate into 'bad'

virulent germs when their soil is suitable for this change.

In other words, germs can modify their structure and metabolic

function according to the environment in which they find themselves.

They exist in a multitude of strains, shapes and metabolic

capabilities and may appear as rod-shaped or circular shaped

depending on the dictates of their environment.

The germ theory was founded on the assumption that disease

germs are specific, unchangeable entities in their biological structure

and chemical characteristics. The 1968 Pulitzer Prizewinner and

eminent bacteriologist Dr Rene J. Dubos contradicted this

assumption, showing that the virulence of microbial species is

variable.

As far back as 1914 in the Journal of Infectious Diseases,

experiments by E. C. Risenow, M.D., of the Mayo Biological

Laboratories in Rochester, Minnesota, demonstrated that pus germs

(streptococci) can be transformed into pneumonia germs

(pneumococci) simply by making minor alterations in their environment

and by feeding them on pneumonia virus—dead organic

matter characteristic with the manifestation of the disease.

When the procedure was reversed, the bacteria quickly reverted to

the pus germs. In each case when the environment and food source

were changed, the germs, regardless of type, quickly mutated into

other forms.

Two New York City bacteriologists, in

similar experiments, converted cocci (round,

berry-shaped bacteria) into bacilli (long, rodshaped

bacteria) and back again. A coccus

(pneumonia germ) can change to a bacillus

(typhoid germ) simply by making minor

alterations in its environment and by feeding

it typhoid virus—specific dead organic

matter which is particular to this type of

bacteria proliferation.

When the procedure is reversed, typhoid

germs revert to pneumonia germs illustrating

that, indeed, any bacteria can modify and

adapt its structure and metabolic function in

accordance with its changing environment.

The virulence of germs can likewise be altered in the laboratory at

will by the technician.

The Toxic Body Produces the Virulent Germ

It is evident, then, that germs do not directly produce disease:

rather, the body-generated healing crisis produces the germ by

providing a suitable environment where non-toxic bacteria mutate

into toxic micro-organisms within septic surroundings. For germs to

become dangerous, they must be intermingled with concentrated

waste products before a germ metamorphoses into a toxic entity.

While it is true that germs and bacteria exist everywhere, the

micro-organisms only proliferate in the body when a person

develops toxemia as a result of an unhealthy lifestyle.

When high quantities of oxidized organic material are being

extraordinarily eliminated by the body via the throat, lungs or

elsewhere, bacteria multiply geometrically. In hours, they may

number in the trillions but suitable 'soil' must be present before they

can proliferate.

Strep throat and sore throat are said to be caused by streptococcus

bacteria. This is a common form of bacteria in the lactobacilli

family, a round-shaped organism that also breaks down or sours

milk.

You can easily prepare a culture containing billions of strep

bacteria as in yoghurt, and any healthy person eating the yoghurt

will not develop strep throat. Put them in a milk culture, and in

hours they multiply into trillions. It is difficult to find anyone who

does not contain this form of bacteria in their throat except in those

using massive amounts of antibiotics or other life-destroying drugs.

Streptococci are not in themselves dangerous, however, for millions

of them are found in the average person's throat and body

cavities—but their excrement can be highly toxic as they help break

down, decompose and putrefy waste materials which the body then

eliminates through the lungs, throat, mucous membranes and/or

skin.

A sore throat is actually an irritation of the tissues, caused either

by what is being eliminated there or by some injurious substance

sent down it. Streptococcus bacteria use the exudates as soil. When

a concentration of toxic material is available, their reproduction is

tremendous. To reiterate, streptococci are not harmful bacteria as

they are always a normal portion of the body's flora.

Scientists know that specific bacteria are not always found in

each case of the disease they are supposed to cause. Introducing

germ cultures in a healthy body does not consistently generate

disease symptoms. Numerous experiments feeding pure cultures of

typhoid, pneumonia, diphtheria, tuberculosis and meningitis germs

produced no ill effects.

As mentioned before, in 28-40% of diphtheria

cases, diphtheria bacillus is absent.

Likewise, in about 20% of those suffering

venereal disease (syphilis, herpes, gonorrhoea,

etc.) neither gonococcus nor spirochetes are

present. Saying that bacteria causes an ulcer,

pustule or pimple about the genitals disregards

the fact that these result from the body's

autolysis (self-digestion) of issue. The creation

of boils and inflammations characteristic of

V.D. are vital body actions, not bacterial or

viral invasions.

Similarly, pneumonia is thought to be

caused by the bacterium pneumococcus,

although it is absent in more than 25% of cases. Moreover,

administering the bacterium to healthy organisms does not occasion

the disease.

Even during the early stages of the common cold, nasal secretions

are completely void of bacteria, as none are found in the thin watery

mucus in the first two to three days. When thick purulent secretion

begins, pneumococci, staphylococci and streptococci appear. Since

bacteria are so conspicuously absent at the onset of a cold, another

cause had to be found. Now, 150 different viruses are blamed for

the affliction.

Colds are not 'caught'; rather, they develop from our enervating

way of life. Bacteria or viruses have nothing to do with the development

of colds. They may be complicating features, since bacteria

function as saprophytes (scavengers) feeding on the debris being

eliminated. As long as tissues remain abnormal, bacteria thrive.

Once the eliminative and purging actions are completed, they

subside.

Physicians readily admit that they do not know exactly which virus

causes colds, for when the cold virus is sprayed into throats

it causes inflammation in "susceptible hosts only"—in those whose

tissues are already irritated by foreign agents. In addition, so-called

respiratory pathogenic bacteria are present in throat washings of

those who have colds, but killing the microorganisms does not

shorten the period of illness.

Colds are preventable, but first we must learn their causes. As long

as it is assumed that germs and viruses cause colds and that we

'catch' them, and as long as our efforts are directed against these

microscopic entities, the cold will prevail. Colds are actually

remedial efforts made necessary by the accumulation in the blood,

lymph, and tissues of unexcreted metabolic waste, and by the

intestinal absorption of toxic by-products of indigestion.

The ultimate causes of the cold are habits of living which reduce

digestive efficiency, check elimination and cause enervation, permitting

the internal environment to become polluted—a state of

physiological smog, if you will.

Unless a germ will cause a disease every time it 'infects' the body,

it is not a cause. A cause must be consistent and specific in its

influence. Germs are omnipresent and fail to have a specific

influence all the time.

Both laboratory evidence and empirical observations substantiate

that disease is the body's reaction to intoxication, and not to germs—

bacteria do not invade nor control the body, for they are always

within the physical domain.

The Body Controls its Bacterial Population

Normal healthy organisms are actually deadly to germs and parasites

and have innate, built-in resources to handle them. Bacteria are

helpless against living cells, especially

white blood cells and others that

compose our natural lines of defence.

We harbour countless billions of

micro-organisms within our intestinal

tract, within our skin, in our mouth,

nose and other body cavities. The

celebrated Dr Lewis Thomas, who

heads the Sloan-Kettering Cancer

Institute, said: "Pity not the man who

has caught bacteria, rather pity the

bacteria that was caught by the man."

Humans furnish a very rough

environment for bacteria, keeping them

tightly restricted and controlled.

Lymph nodes—the glandular tissue masses that occur along the

lymphatic vessels throughout the body—routinely remove bacteria

and foreign particles from the general lymph circulation and supply

lymphocytes to the circulatory system. The lymph nodes and spleen

form a portion of the body's reticuloendothelial system— referring

to those phagocytic cells scattered throughout the body which can

ingest bacteria, solid particles and other errant cells. This aids in

keeping the body in a healthy, stable condition.

For example, billions and even trillions of bacteria and fungi are

incidentally absorbed from the intestinal tract into the portal blood

each day. These are so effectively apprehended and destroyed by

our white blood cells and macrophages that scarcely any bacteria or

fungi ever enter the circulating blood.

Leukocytes (white corpuscles) are the blood's defensive organisms

that prevent intoxication by bacteria, cooked food debris or

other toxic materials. Leukocytosis (an excessive proliferation of

white blood cells in the circulation) occurs in response to inflammation,

to excessive numbers of bacteria in the body, and to a preponderance

preponderance

of cooked food—all of which represent pathological

phenomena.

The body must exist in a toxic state before it will institute the

disease process. Neither bacteria nor anything else can start and

sustain a healing crisis—micro-organisms are incapable of unified

action and cannot exist where there is no food (soil) for them to

survive. Living healthy cells are not soil for bacteria, but

decomposing substances are.

If a healthy body can 'catch' a cold or flu due to influenza germs

and is unable to resist an 'attack' by these micro-organisms, then how

can the subsequently debilitated body ever recover? How can the

weakened organism repel the onslaught of trillions of proliferating

micro-organisms? The inevitable result would be the death of the

organism.

If bacteria did invade organisms and subsequently laid them low,

as medically supposed, the impetus and momentum they built up in

the process would become progressively more pronounced and

overwhelming as the organism receded further into disease.

If germs and microbe 'attackers' overwhelmed a healthy body, then,

once they laid a victim low, their proliferating reproduction would

exponentially increase the 'devouring', which would cease only when

they had exhausted their food supply. There would be no recovery.

If bacteria and viruses cause disease and debilitate the body, how

does the weakened individual recover?

Were germs the cause of disease, there would be no remission, and

germ proliferation would continue unimpeded.

Once the invading entities have a head start, it does not seem they

would stop their destruction but,

instead, would further diminish the

organism's ability to defend itself.

When bacteria start decomposing a

body, only complete exhaustion of all

organic materials ends their course—

only when 'the bones are picked clean',

so to speak.

Logic

tells us that if microbial organisms

make someone sick' and proliferate by

the billions as they become more

numerous and stronger, they would

progressively sap more and more

energy, vitality and resources from their victim. How can this

process be reversed by a much weakened organism?

The whole concept of being laid low by microbes and then turning

the tables on them makes for good fiction, but is physiologically

false. For once dominance is established in nature over a weakened

organism, it's downhill from there. Once zebras are overwhelmed by

carnivores, they rarely survive. Once bacteria start decomposing

organic matter, they continue until their food source is exhausted.

The body does not suppress the growth and multiplication of

'disease germs' until the morbid toxins on which they subsist have

been consumed, and until the inflammatory process has run its

course.

When diseases are said by medical authorities to be 'limited', this

really means the illness is a body detoxification process that is

terminated by the body when its purging objectives are reached. The

body is in control, and not at the mercy of hordes of microbes or

some 'mysterious disease entity'.

Disease, once more, is not caused by germs but by the toxic state of

the body which allows the germ to flourish. This deranged state of the organism is the outgrowth of violating our

biological requirements, and is no chance or haphazard condition.

It is this diseased condition that creates an environment

favourable to the mutation of bacteria into those associated with

specific disease, and to their increasing virulence and proliferation.

A state of internal cleanliness, therefore, is essential for health

and well-being A pure bloodstream, free unimpeded circulation of

all body fluids, and unobstructed excretion generate and maintain

healthy tissue Virulent bacteria soon die in this environment for

want of suitable nourishment

If the microbe is to have any part in causing disease, it must find

an organism that produces suitable soil for its metabolic activities

We cannot avoid germs for they are everywhere—we must be proof

against them We avoid disease only by keeping ourselves in such a

state of health that germs are powerless against us

Medical Rationale of "Susceptibility" and "Resistance"

Everyone has literally trillions of fungi, bacteria and viruses in

their body even when healthy When physicians are confronted with

this, they say that disease is not caused by these agencies because

"you are not susceptible' or because "your resistance is high'

This is a cop-out, saying that these agents do not cause disease,

but those factors which dispose us to susceptibility do -

since the word "susceptible" means that the criterion which establishes

susceptibility is the actual cause of disease, and not the

micro-organism or the agency blamed This cop-out confirms that

the supposed contagious agents—bacteria, viruses and fungi—

do not cause disease The actual cause is whatever causes

susceptibility or low resistance

If we maintain our body in a clean, healthy state then germs

are irrelevant, for susceptibility does not exist. The concept of

susceptibility is really the medical rationale which admits that

bacteria only proliferate when the internal physiological condition

warrants it To repeat, it is an admission that an unclean environment

is really the cause of disease—for if germs were the cause of

disease, everyone exposed to the harmful germ would become sick

with the same illness

When the condition of susceptibility is introduced into medical

theory to describe disease causation, the condition of the host is then

of primary importance in the production of disease.

Susceptible individuals are those with a high degree of body

toxicity and sufficient vitality to conduct the disease/purification

process When such sufficient vitality is waning, organic tissue

damage occurs from the extraordinarily polluted internal state of the

body which creates the foundation for chronic disease So long as

our body is relatively pure, however, waste materials do not

accumulate and the scavenging assistance of bacterial germs is not

called upon

Physicians say that our resistance against germs is our only protection

to avoid disease, but they leave their patients ignorant of

how to guarantee a high degree of resistance at all times We are told

that germs invade only when resistance is lost. But what causes a

loss of resistance? Obviously, loss of health means diminished

resistance

So if health is the best protection against disease, why not promote

health by educating the populace in the requisites of health

according to their biological mandate? Why not create a true "health

care" system, instead of the prevailing "disease care" system that

currently exists? We must promote health by living life according to

those factors upon which health is generated.

Exposing the Myth of the

GERM THEORY

Germs, viruses

and bacteria are

not the cause of

disease

Our best

defence is good

health

Part 2

The Viral Theory of Disease Causation

Initially, the word "virus" meant poison, and the word "virulent" meant poisonous. Today, virus

means a submicroscopic entity, and virulent generally means contagious. Modem medicine has

employed the term virus to mean an ultra-minute form of life that infects cells, and which is

blamed for causing more and more of our diseases.

According to the popular portrayal of the virus, it is a form of life that parasitises all life

forms including animal, plant, and saprophytic (fungi and bacteria).

In descriptions of viral disease, viruses are credited with such actions as "injecting

themselves", "incubating", "laying in wait", "invading", having an "active stage", "commanding",

"reactivating", "disguising themselves", "infecting", "conducting sieges" and being

"devastating" and "deadly".

Conventional medical theory explains that viruses come from dying cells which they have

infected—the virus "injects" itself into the cell and "commands" it to reproduce itself, and this

occurs until the cell explodes from the burden. Viruses are then free to seek out other cells to

repeat the process, thereby infecting the organism.

Virologists admit, however, that although viruses are distinctive and definitely organic in

nature, they have no metabolism, cannot be replicated in the laboratory, do not possess any

characteristics of living things and, in fact, have never been observed alive!!

"Live Viruses" Are Always Dead

The term "live virus" means only those created from living tissue cultures in vitro (within the

laboratory) since trillions of them result from "live" tissue. But herein lies the point: even

though some laboratory cultures are kept alive, there is massive cell turnover in the process,

and it is from these dying cells that "viruses" are obtained. They are always dead and inactive

because they have no metabolism or life, except being molecules of DNA and protein.

Viruses contain nucleic acid and protein but lack enzymes, and cannot support life on their

own since they do not even possess the first prerequisites of life, namely metabolic control

mechanisms (and even 'lowly' bacteria have these). Guyton's Medical Textbook acknowledges

that viruses have no reproductive system, no locomotion, no metabolism, and cannot be

reproduced as live entities in vitro.

The Mitochondria Connection

Since "viruses" are not alive, they cannot act in any of the ways as ascribed to them by

medical authorities except as a functional unit of our normal genetic material inside the cell's

nucleus or the mitochondrian nucleus within the cell.

Mitochondria are living organisms—just one of many of the varying organelles (little

organs) within each cell of our body. Mitochondria are about the size of bacteria, both of

which have their own DNA and their own metabolism.

The mitochondria metabolise glucose into ATP molecules, which is ready-made energy

usable when called upon by the body. What do these facts have to do with "viruses" as such?

Everything, as you will see in just a moment.

For anyone who has studied cytology (cell structure), the greatest number of life-forms

within a cell are the mitochondria—the creators of our energy.

Simple single-celled protozoa have up to a half-million mitochondria within them. Human

cells have less—from a few hundred in blood cells, to 30,000 or more in our larger muscletissue

cells. Since the entire human body contains some 75 to 100 trillion cells,

each containing, on the average, thousands of mitochondria, there must

be quadrillions or quintillions of them in our system.

When a cell dies, it is replaced by a daughter cell during the process

of mitosis, and the spent cell is disintegrated by lysosomes—the potent

self-destructing, self-digesting, intracellular enzymes that break up

cellular components into ultra-minute particles so that the body can

readily recycle them or excrete them as waste.

Each day, about 300 billion to over a half-trillion cells in our body

expire (depending on our level of toxicity), each containing an average

of 5,000-20,000 mitochondria. When cells die they are self-destructed

by their own lysosomes, but the nuclei and the genomes of

mitochondria are better protected than other cellular organelles and

protoplasm and often do not completely decompose.

Genomes and nuclei are microscopic templates of genetic information

consisting of DNA or RNA that act as the control centre and

the storehouse of the very 'blueprints' of the cell. As such, they are to

mitochondria and cells what brains are to our body.

Every cell and every mitochondrion contains this generic material

which is actually the most protected pan of the cell (by virtue of its

double-lipid protein sheath), just as our nervous system is the most

vital and most protected portion of our physiology (by virtue of our

backbone and skull).

Upon cellular death, mitochondria are broken down by lysosomes

but not always completely, due to their highly protective doublemembrane

sheath. And here is where this explanation gets interesting.

According to Guyton's Textbook of

Medical Physiology, a virus is said to be

a minute bit of genetic material (called a

genome) which is literally about a

billionth the size of a cell.

The genome is surrounded by a capsid

covering that is usually a double lipidprotein

sheath and is actually composed

of two unit membranes (almost identical

to the cell membrane) which, incidentally,

is the very structure of the

mitochondrian nucleus.

Photos of "viruses" revealed through

electron microscopes show their

membranes to be rough and jagged,

sometimes only pan of one layer and

sometimes one layer and a portion of the second, which is consistent

with the self-digesting action of lysosomes when their job of breaking

down cellular waste is partial and incomplete. As such, this description

of a "virus" is virtually identical with the description of the remaining

genomes of the cell's mitochondria as well.

At one point, viruses were once living matter and some physiology

texts hypothesise that they are the debris of spent cells. Lysosomes that

disintegrate the spent cell often fail to break up these "viruses"

surrounded by the double-lipid coat membrane.

It is surprising that researchers fail to recognise these for what they

apparently are—spent mitochondrian generic material, particularly

fragments of RNA and DNA.

"Viruses" Are Not Micro-organisms

Even though medical authorities mistakenly attribute to this dead

cellular debris the powers of life and malevolence, microbi-ologists

acknowledge that viruses are dead bits of DNA in a protein-lipid

membrane coat, although failing it realise its source.

As such, genomes are control mechanisms but not micro-organisms

organisms

as the medical establishment would have us believe, since these

so-called "viruses" are merely lifeless fragments of mito-chondrial

generic debris. Because of this, viruses cannot cause disease unless

they accumulate as filth and pollute our cells, tissues and circulation

upon cellular death.

Viruses, then, are dead genomes from disintegrated cells whose

cellular membrane is not completely broken down by cellular

lysosomes.

Genomes have no characteristics of life whatsoever, and are merely

bits of nucleic acid material normally recycled through phagocytosis or

excreted as waste.

Photos of alleged viruses "injecting themselves" into a cell actually

show the cell literally engulfing the "virus" or proteinaceous debris.

A dent, called invaginarion, then forms and the organic matter is

surrounded by cellular substance which closes off, forming an

impromptu stomach, and the "virus" disappears. The stomach then fills

with powerful lysosome enzymes which digest the organic material,

breaking it down into ammo acids and fatty acids for recycling or

elimination.

This process is a normal feature of cell physiology called phagocytosis (literally, cell-eating)—

the routine process of cellular inges-tion and enzymatic digestion of

bacteria, dead tissue debris and other errant cells.

Viruses are merely inert organic material totally devoid of all life

qualities and are never seen to act. Photographs purporting to show

viruses in action are outright frauds: what is

actually shown is an ordinary physiological

process of phagocytosis which occurs

countless times daily within the body.

Remember, according to medical texts on

virology and microbiology, viruses have the

following un-lifelike characteristics:

1) Viruses have no metabolism—they

cannot process food-stuffs or nutriment and

they have no energy formation. They are

only a template, or pattern of information,

as are all genomes.

2) Viruses have no faculties for action of

any kind—no nervous system, no sensory

apparatus, and no intelligence that may

coordinate movement or "bodily invasion" of any kind.

3) Viruses cannot replicate themselves—they supposedly depend

entirely upon "obligate reproduction"—meaning, reproduction by a

host organism, something totally unheard of in all biology.

Obligate Reproduction

In the medical rationale to viral disease causation, we are told to

believe in obligate reproduction, where one organism (the cell) is

obligated to reproduce an alien organism (the "virus"). Nowhere in

nature, however, does any living thing reproduce anything other than

its own kind.

Do not forget that the size relationship of a virus to a cell is literally

about one billionth the size. The viral rationale of disease-causation

tells us to believe that the virus injects itself into the cell and

commands it to reproduce the virus hundreds of thousands of times,

upon which the cell explodes.

When the virus "reproduces", its collective mass still equals far less

than 1/lOOth of one per cent of the mass of the cell. That is like

saying if you inject yourself with half an ounce of a sub-Stance, it will cause so much internal pressure that you will explode!!

Only living micro-organisms are capable of acting and reproducing,

which is under direct control of the nucleus, genome or "brain". A socalled

"virus" is a detached pan of a once organically functioning entity

whose genetic structure has the same relationship that a head has to a

body: to ascribe any action to viruses is roughly akin to attributing

actions to a dead person's decapitated head!

Viruses Are Toxic Only As Accumulated Wastes

Our blood and tissues may become saturated with these internally

generated waste materials, as well as from pollutants ingested from the

outside. Intoxication occurs as these overload the body beyond its

ability to eject them.

Viruses do cause disease in as much as they are toxic waste

materials. In this sense, "viruses" do indeed occasion disease but not as

contagious agents.

Remember, bacteria, germs, and viruses do not communicate or act

in concert and are incapable of conducting joint operations like armies

of attackers—they lack the intelligence and resources required to

conduct the disease process. Only the body can initiate such a healing

crisis since the body is the only unified intelligent entity capable of

conducting physiological processes termed "disease".

Avoid "Infections" Through Healthful Living

Boyd's Medical Textbook states that most

normal persons harbour viruses without

developing the particular diseases the viruses

are supposed to cause, and that enervating

influences overcome the body's protective

functions, "permitting the viruses to usurp the

biological activities within the cell".

More specifically, according to medical

theory, for a parasite or virus to be

pathogenic it has to meet three criteria:

1) It must be biochemically active—it

must have metabolic capacity in order to

perform action.

2) It would have to infect or intoxicate

more of the host's cells than the animal or

human organism could spare or regenerate—

for instance, you would only suffer from influenza if the virus kills or

infects a significant portion of your lung's cells; the polio virus if it

affects enough of your nerve cells; or the hepatitis virus if it takes hold

of a large portion of your liver cells. (Latent infections are those that

involve a small percentage of our cells, like tuberculosis, which most

of us have and do not even notice.)

3) The host must be genetically and immunologically permissive. It

has to accept the pathogen and cannot be "immune" to it— it has to

"let it happen", so to speak.

Humans are always "infected" with bacteria and "viruses" as they

are present in the body at all times—therefore, one cannot say they

"invade" the host. Diseases are not infections; rather, they are body

purification processes and are not created by bacteria or "viruses".

Neither "viruses" nor bacteria can cause the illness/healing crisis.

The real culprit is the biologically incorrect lifestyle of the sufferer.

When debilitating habits are discontinued there are no further toxic

accumulations, and the need for the body to generate the

healing/disease process will cease to exist. Health is the natural result Drugs Are Counterproductive

To kill off bacteria and viruses to enable the body a chance to

recover, medics believe that they must administer drugs. They also

believe that medicine assists in healing. Drugs indeed kill off bacteria,

but they are just as deadly to all forms of metabolic life including

human cells.

The use of drugs and herbal medicines sabotage the body's

detoxification efforts by posing an additional threat to the system

besides the vile substances it was ejecting via the disease process.

Eliminating the newly-ingested offending substance now takes

precedence over those which caused the healing crisis in the first place.

The medical practice of killing germs with drugs, antibiotics, antiinflammatory

agents or serums to suppress germ activity is the cause of

increasing degeneration of the population and iatrogenic disease.

Acute disease is self-limiting, according to the time and effort

required to rid the organism of injurious substances. The work

performed by scavenging bacteria during the disease process is both

exhausting and unpleasant to the host but is vitally necessary for the

preservation of life and health.

After the detoxification process is complete, disease symptoms

disappear and the organism again makes its energies amount for

normal endeavours. Strength then returns to the extremities. The body,

although debilitated from the effort

made necessary by its toxic condition,

regains its powers and functional

vitality and recovers without treatment.

When the healing crisis is completed,

recovery begins. The Illusion Of

Contagion

People have been educated to be

terrified of bacteria and viruses and to

believe implicitly in the idea of

contagion—that specific,

malevolently-aggressive disease

entities pass from one host to another.

"Contagion" is medically defined as

the transmission of disease by

contact—an infectious disease is

communicable by contact with one suffering from it, or with an object

touched by them. The dictionary cites the mechanism as "viruses or

other infective agents" or "something that serves as a medium to

transmit disease either by direct or indirect means".

Contagion is a medical myth, however, since toxic wastes cannot be

passed from one body to the next via normal contact. The contagious

diseases are deceptive, for no one can give his or her disease to another

any more than one can give away his or her health. Something similar

to contagion seems to occur when an extremely toxaemic person is

exposed to someone similarly ill— thereby triggering a healing crisis.

What's Really Going On Here?

Bacteria or germs of such individuals are stimulated into action by

those devitalised elements upon which the bacteria thrive. When

transferred to the mucus membranes or tissues of another person

equally toxaemic, the bacteria may begin working immediately in the

same manner as in the host carrier if adequate decomposition products

exist as a food source for bacterial colonies to take hold and thrive.

But a soiled environment is a prerequisite to such bacterial action.

The healthy individual with an uncontaminated, relatively pure

bloodstream therefore need not be concerned nor apprehensive about

"contagious disease".

We usually cannot transfer our toxic load to someone else unless it is

drawn out of us (as in donating blood) and then injected into another

person (as in transfusion). This represents medically-induced

contagion or iatrogenic disease, rather than those occurring within the

realm of natural biological life processes. This is the true explanation

of "contagion". The germ triggers, precipitates or excites the disease

process in those who are tox-aemic. But in those who are not,

contagion is not valid and does not exist so long as the body is pure—

for it is the soil in the system that prepares the body for "contagions"

by our failure to keep our body fluids and tissues clean and nonpolluted.

The Actual "Contagious" Factors and Influences

In reality, there is no such thing as "contagion", for the only diseaseproducing

agents are biologically unhealthful habits such as

indulgence in alcohol, coffee, cigarettes, drugs, junk foods, refined

foods, too little rest and sleep, lack of exercise and sunshine, etc.

It is the biologically incorrect lifestyle practices which cause

diseases that are rampant throughout the population. It is not any 'bug

that is going around': it is what we do to our

own body that violates its systemic needs.

"Susceptibility" Revisited

The concept of "contagion" is closely related

to the equally erroneous notion of

"susceptibility"—for a contagion is supposedly

"contagious" only if the individual is

"susceptible". This medical rationale is really

an admission that germs do not cause disease.

If they did, everyone exposed would become

sick with the same disease.

Actually, a "susceptible" person is one with a

high degree of body toxicity, along with the

sufficient vitality to conduct the disease/

purification process. The individual may

become ill whether exposed to a "contagion" or

not at any given time.

When truly healthy individuals maintain their health while in the

midst of "communicable or epidemic diseases", then it must be selfevident

that the theory of contagion is incorrect.

The pan of the body most laden with toxins is the first to exhibit

disease symptoms, but the overall effect is systemic as all the organs

and glands of the system suffer impairment to some degree.

And How About Our True "Epidemics"?

Furthermore, the most prevalent diseases around are not even

contagious. Over 90 per cent of all Americans have plaque in their

arteries, yet this is not considered contagious. (But AIDS, which is

declared to be an epidemic, affects only l/10,000th the number of

people!!) Is obesity considered contagious? It affects one of every

three people. How about constipation? It affects about 90 per cent of

our population.

And is bad eyesight which affects two of every three persons

contagious? The same can be said for bad teeth, high blood pressure,

headaches, lower back problems, etc., as these diseases are extremely

widespread. More than half of all Americans have cardiovascular

problems, but are they contagious? The most feared of all diseases is

cancer. Is it contagious? Arthritis affects more people than herpes. Is

it contagious? And how about asthma and acne?

Take colds for instance. How is it that infants have about eight colds

per year while the parents only a few? How is it that those persons

isolated at observation posts in the North and South Poles 'catch' colds

during their stay? How is it that between 1965-67 the National

Institutes of Health's cold laboratories in Bethesda, Maryland

conducted experiments that showed everything but contagion?

Volunteers were swabbed daily with supposed cold "viruses" taken

directly from those suffering colds, and none became ill. More in the

control group developed colds. In the meantime, shortly following

traditional Thanksgiving feasts, the number of colds in both groups

increased dramatically as would be expected when excessively rich

food and drink is consumed during holiday festivities.

Venereal disease is also supposed to be contagious—but the socalled

contagious factors (bacteria) are present because of the disease

and are not the cause of the condition (and 20 per cent or so of those

suffering V.D. have neither gonococcus nor spirochetes which are said

to cause it).

The US Navy conducted experiments which showed that so-called

"infected persons" could not infect those termed healthy.

In Japan, "infected" prostitutes had been with dozens of G.I.s, none

of whom contracted the disease. Similarly, many individuals have

"infections" in the genital area who have

not been in contact with anyone (as seen

in cases involving young children).

The concept of contagion is medically

unproven despite appearances to the

contrary. The Bottom Line

So-called "contagious diseases" like

AIDS, venereal disease and athlete's foot

are no more contagious than any other

disease—but it does serve certain

commercial interests to make people

believe that they are.

Basically, acceptance of the theory of

contagion is contingent upon acceptance

of the germ theory of disease—that

specific bacteria or "viruses" produce

specific disease symptoms. This theory has been repeatedly

demonstrated as incorrect in the scientific field, and was even admitted

by Pasteur as being incorrect.

Nevertheless, the germ theory and the theory of contagion are

perpetuated by our modem medical system whose prestige, profits and

power are largely based on belief in this erroneous theory.

The belief in contagion is difficult to overcome since almost

everyone's mind has been similarly 'infected' by exploitive 'health care'

industries that have a vested interest in disease and suffering and in

perpetuating such erroneous beliefs.

Basically, the populace believes what the medical establishment

wants it to. The theory of contagion maintains the demand for their

drug, medical and hospital practices.

If you live healthfully you will likely never suffer disease. Diseases

are caused only by unhealthful lifestyle practices.

Do not forget, only the drug, hospital and medical industries teach that

health is recovered by administering poisonous drugs.

This perhaps is one of the most prominent seeds of "contagious"

disease. The bottom line is that if germs play any role in the causation

of disease, it is never a primary one but is always secondary to those

causes that lower our resistance or impair health.

Good health is the maximum insurance against all disease in all cases