Acid-Alkaline PH is legit karmi logic to be vegetarian

[bhaktajan]

See Your Blood via Dark-field Microscope!

 

There are many dark-field microscopists around today, and if you want to get motivated to take care of your health, go visit one! You will be able to see your live blood on video, and I guarantee you one of the most fascinating office visits of your “medical” career! You will witness the state of your moving red blood cells, and whether or not they are all clumped together, which makes oxygen exchange with the tissue difficult. You will see the activity level of your wiggling macrophages as they gobble down debris. You may see cholesterol or parasites.

You will learn about the state of your liver. You may meet the endobiant, the mutating symbiotic bacteria in your blood, which serves you in a healthy state, and composts you in the pathological state! You will see how your blood ages over the time of your visit, which gives an indication of how your body is aging.

Your practitioner will very likely give you a list of recommended diet and lifestyle changes as well as a video of your blood, so that you can compare it with future readings. Then later you can come back and see how those changes have changed your blood picture, and what you may still need to work on. If you can, take a friend, and at least one of you may be not so healthy, so you can actually observe the differences in your blood pictures. Your attitude toward health care will never be the same!

For more information on dark-field microscopy, see Steven Denk’s excellent website "www.biomedx.com", where you can also order his small but excellent book How You Rot and Rust, one of the most succinct, understandable, and downright helpful explanations of the pleiomorphic biology of disease I have ever read.

These brilliant microscopists have developed methods for observing the blood and for interpreting what they see. This enables them to advise you about diet and life style changes that will help you improve your body’s terrain, and so discourage, perhaps even eliminate, the diseases which your present diet and lifestyle have created.

[bhaktajan]

Health Theory of Natural Hygienists

Natural Hygiene proposes some extremely interesting and provocative theories. Practitioners assert that what we call disease is actually the body trying to purge itself of toxins or, failing that, to store them in the body in the way least likely to interfere with function.

Since disease is merely the process of a toxic body trying to clean itself out, any “treatment” to stop the symptom is actually counter productive because it interferes with the body’s efforts to reestablish healthy balance through tissue detoxification. They believe that any medication that produces disease in a healthy body should be withheld from a sick one, and that only those conditions producing health in a healthy body—vital food, clean air, pure water, sunshine, exercise, and adequate rest—should be supplied to a sick one.

Natural Hygienists deal with “disease” by carefully supporting it and allowing it to run its course, trusting the body’s innate drive to create health. In this modality, there is no attempt to cure, only to supply the conditions of health, thereby supporting the body’s natural drive to return to normal healthy function. To do anything else, the natural hygienists believe, just gets in the way of the body healing itself. Basically, that means no medication. Period.

Hygienists claim that the apparent beneficial action of medications in stopping symptoms is due to the body’s having to shift gears to get rid of the medicine, forcing the body to put its cleansing efforts on the back burner to take care of the greater evil, the drug you just gave it in your misguided attempt to “help.” By stopping the symptom, you have handicapped and burdened your body’s self healing capacity and forced the body to resort to increasingly desperate means to jettison its toxins. Any substance you would not be taking when healthy will just be one more toxin the beleaguered body must eject.

So, in the system of natural hygiene, you assist the ailing body, not by trying to make it get well, but by facilitating its being “sick”! To do this, you must both supply everything necessary to support healthy function and remove all those influences and foods that the body cannot use. And then you must leave the body alone to heal itself.

Of course, this approach goes against our every instinct, conditioned as we are by the allopaths. But when you consider that animals generally take this approach when sick, refusing food, and retreating to a cave to sleep, perhaps you will be willing to consider this theory further.

[bhaktajan]

The Progression of Disease

 

According to natural health theory, “disease”—the body’s attempts to right itself—proceeds in a natural progression in response to the ways we moderns care for our bodies. In our modern lifestyles we accumulate many toxins.

A toxin is any substance that our bodies cannot use to build health, and must therefore eject, burn, or store in some part of the body. Toxins, which our body itself creates, are called endotoxins (dead cells, used hormones, etc); external toxins, those that come to us from outside our bodies, are called exotoxins (pesticides, air pollution). Almost anything that we are not adapted to by evolution is likely to act as a toxin in our bodies.

Getting rid of these toxins is a very high priority for our bodies, because high levels of toxins interfere with normal function, and can eventually interfere to the point of death. The more toxins we accumulate, the more energy the body has to expend to get rid of them, and the less energy the body has available for other purposes. If toxins accumulate faster than we are able to process and eliminate them, our body stores them in the best place it can find at the time—a joint, fat tissue, or an area of the body that has poor circulation and cannot move the toxins out as fast as other areas.

According to Hygienist theory, at a certain level of toxicity, a vital body will make an attempt to throw off its toxins. The energy with which a body attempts to throw off the toxins is proportionate to the amount of vitality that the body still possesses.

Children are usually strong and vital, and are notorious for the sudden violence but short duration of their acute illnesses. As the body ages, it usually loses vitality and its attempts at detoxification will be fewer and weaker. The body learns to live with the toxins, but only at a tremendous compromise, with corresponding loss in health and vitality.

When the body attempts a “housecleaning” and tries to throw off its accumulated toxins, fluids, and crud exude from the body and we say we have a cold, flu, fever, diarrhea, eczema, etc: we are describing the symptom or form the self-cleaning reaction is taking.

But instead of allowing the body to expel its toxins, we try to stop the process, which we view as a symptom of disease. We take some allopathic medicine like aspirin, a cold medicine, an anti-diarrheal, or a skin cream. In short, rather than supporting the process of cleansing, we call it a disease and stop it as fast as possible!

By suppressing the symptom, we actually interfere with the body’s attempt to heal itself. As we continue to suppress the symptoms, our vital and valiant body registers increasing toxicity and tries again to dump the growing toxic load—harder! We get a more serious symptom, which prompts more aggressive symptom suppression, and then the beleaguered body has to try harder again!

Not only is the body struggling with an increasing load of the “normal” toxins accumulating from the modern lifestyle, but now the body is being laced with even more toxins: the medicines that our modern pharmacist has in his arsenal of symptom-suppressive weapons.

When a substance has no normal function in the body’s biochemical and metabolic processes—in other words, when it is not part of our biologically mandated or evolutionarily adapted environment—the body has to work at throwing it off so as not to become overloaded in a tremendous internal traffic jam.

Hygienists believe that when a drug is administered to suppress a symptom, what actually happens is that the body stops trying to cleanse and directs its attention to ejecting the drug, which has become the greater threat.

The body expends its precious vitality getting rid of the drug, and then has to rest while it accumulates enough energy to try to cleanse again later. But instead of being stronger, as it might have been had it been allowed to decrease its toxic load through the cold or flu, the body is now weaker. The vicious cycle of symptom suppression continues, and the body wastes its precious vitality in a struggle that is futile in the face of our continuous suppression of its cleansing efforts.

For example, a body overladen with toxic debris musters the energy to attempt a housecleaning. When it chooses the mucous membranes of the head as a dumping vehicle and the nose as exit, we have a cold. We suppress the symptoms with antihistamines, leaving an accumulation of toxins in the body while the body rallies its resources for another attempt at cleansing. Now perhaps the body tries for a flu, which is an escalated pathway, enabling the body to dump toxins faster than a mere cold. So we take cold and flu medicine with a nice fever suppressant.

After we have suppressed the flu, perhaps the body will try a chronic sinus infection, or perhaps pneumonia; or, unable to jettison the toxins, maybe it will try to store them in the joints as arthritis or in the tissue as cellulite, or even cancer.

The process of escalation continues, and our body uses up its limited vitality in a pointless, destructive, and ultimately futile war with our efforts to suppress the symptoms. Eventually the body lacks the energy or vitality even to try throwing the toxins off, and we move from a series of acute diseases into the chronic degenerative diseases from which most of us eventually die.

We have all been so conditioned to think in terms of the dominant allopathic paradigm, that it is very difficult to wrap our brains around the idea that disease symptoms are actually the body’s attempt to heal, and NOT the evidence of bacteria winning a battle for our bodies.

[bhaktajan]

Logical Flaw in Germ Theory

 

If you think about it carefully, you will realize there is actually a logical flaw in the idea that germs cause disease: all people exposed to these “causative” germs do not succumb to the disease. If germs actually cause disease, then anyone exposed to the causative germs should get the disease. In fact, healthy individuals usually have many if not most of these “causative” germs constantly residing in their bodies, and yet continue to be healthy.

So the germs themselves are not in and of themselves causative. As the scientists say, germs cause disease in susceptible individuals. This statement actually puts the causative factor squarely in the arena of host resistance: if you are healthy, if your terrain is balanced, you will not develop disease, even if you are exposed to, or even harbor, the associated germs.

We must note here that medical commerce is driven by the profit motive. There is little profit on the side of this equation that has to do with increasing individual resistance, thereby decreasing susceptibility. There is a great deal of profit to be made on the side of the equation that is pushing the war on germs and the chemical suppression of symptoms.

So of course the vast majority of the research by western scientists (largely funded both directly and indirectly by pharmaceutical companies) has been aimed at the germ side of this statement, identifying the germs as causative agents and finding the correct weapon, a medicine/drug, to kill them off, often ignoring that weapon’s potentially damaging or even lethal effect on the host!

This is very similar to the way we conduct modern warfare: we often seem willing to demolish a country in order to “liberate it”! In fact most of the language of modern medicine reads like a war story, with valiant researchers continuously inventing and adding more and more powerful drug/weapons to the doctor’s arsenal against disease.

Each new weapon causes escalation of the warfare, which becomes more and more horrific, and the use of the ever-escalating weapons more and more unthinkable. Western medicine is indeed very much like western war, with iatrogenic or physician-induced illness now among the leading causes of death!

Rather than focusing on the germs and the weapons, how much more appropriate and effective to look at what makes some people susceptible and others immune. If we learn to build and support immunity, we can avoid the chemical warfare of modern medicine and the resultant poisoning and crippling of our bodies by toxic medicines which have no natural function in the body, and which so often produce multiple side effects, sometimes unto death. By making the neighborhood (the bodily terrain) unattractive to pathological organisms, perhaps they will simply leave, or better, not show up in the first place.

This approach to health and disease parallels ecological approaches to pest control or agriculture. If you have cockroaches in your house, you can spray for them with poisons and pesticides, which also poison your home, your pets, your children, yourself, and eventually your planet—or you can put all the food in jars and keep the place clean—control their food supply! As organic farmers have learned, pest outbreaks are related to monoculture cropping patterns and to plants weakened by loss of soil fertility. Modern agriculture pumps itself up on chemicals and biocides, yet produces food devoid of vitality while wasting the natural world.

Could we, by adopting healthy patterns of living, cleaning up our environments, and strengthening our natural immunities, avoid the war all together, and spend our precious lives in better health and with time for more interesting and rewarding pursuits than fighting cockroaches, spraying weeds, or popping pills?

With an emphasis on keeping the terrain healthy and balanced as opposed to killing the enemy germs, we can begin to see the world as an interdependent web of organisms, each contributing to the vibrant and balanced life of the other; building sustainable health, perhaps we can create peace.

[bhaktajan]

Pleomorphability of all germs (bacteria, viruses, fungii)

Pleo-morphism means many forms, many or more (pleo-), forms or bodies (morph-). This is in contradistinction to Monomorphism which means one (mono-) body or form.

Modern medicine, bacteriology, is founded on the idea of Mono-morphism where once a germ is a particular germ it always stays that way. According to this way of thinking a streptococcal germ is always a streptococcus. It only has one (mono-) form, it doesn't change into anything else.

Pleomorphism on the other hand maintains that "germs" occur in many forms beginning with the Protit, which can change into a virus, which can change into a bacteria, which can change into a fungus. Any of these forms, bacterial, viral or fungal can and do eventually, break all apart, and turn back into the Protits from whence they came. It starts all over again, life. The Protit never dies. This is a nature of life, It goes on no matter what. A germ is 'a beginning', that's all.

These Protits or colloids of life in our blood, develop or change according to the condition (pH, etc.) of the blood. At some stages of their development they are outright pathogenic (make you sick) and parasitic. These are our internal parasites. These Protits can go in the other direction too and turn into cells we need. See Live Cell Therapy They can help regenerate organs.

The internal parasite, which exists in us always, is in contrast to external parasites with which we occasionally come in contact. This is where the germ theory actually holds relevance. This is the area of external microbes and parasites that when taken to extremes, intensifies into infectious diseases and epidemics which overwhelm the system.

Surprisingly, without having even the slightest idea of pleomorphic biology, medicine through hygiene, has accomplished much in this area. The fact is, opportunistic bugs, bacteria and viruses are all over the place, in our blood even which modern science says is not so, even though they are easily seen. Some of us get sick and some of us don't. As far back as the plagues of the dark ages some lived and some died. One third of the people didn't get plague. Nobody knew why.

Pleomorphism is a concept discovered in the early 1800's. It shows that 'germs' come from inside the body, from the "tiny dots" you can see in the blood with any microscope. These "tiny dots" of course are the colloids of life or Protits.

As the environment that surrounds the cells becomes acid, toxic, polluted, these "tiny dots", Protits, change form, into the microorganisms that clean up the garbage, dead cells, toxins and the like, that are the result of the toxic condition. This is what bacteria, 'germs' are for.

When the host balance is destroyed, when the internal environment the Protits and cells live in, the internal milieu, becomes toxic and acid, the Protits lose their symbiotic (live harmoniously together) and life giving qualities and devolve downward, changing first into viruses, then into bacteria and finally into fungal forms, each stage of which is progressively more hostile to surrounding tissue cells.

Germs, all microorganisms, (viruses, bacteria, fungi and everything in-between) are the result, not the cause of disease!

[bhaktajan]

Louis Pasteur was wrong!

 

His idea of the bacterial cause of disease was wrong!

If "germs" are there as a result, not a cause, then to treat

the resultant germs with antibiotics is, in theory and in fact, wrong!

This basic misconception about disease effects all aspects of medicine.

This is why this is a "new"... biology.

Louis Pasteur is said to have said on his death bed that really he had been wrong about his "Germ Theory" of disease. He said then, in so many words, that, it is not the germ that is the problem, it is the internal environment, the internal milieu that allowed the germ to develop in the first place that is the problem.

Add to this the error of William Harvey, who stated in 1651 that the cell is the smallest unit of life and the magnitude of this issue becomes even more apparent. That was more than 300 years ago!! and still, to this day, this fallacy has not been corrected even though Bechamp (1816-1908) demonstrated that the smallest unit of life was what he called the microzyma and Enderlein again published in 1921 and 1925 that the smallest unit of life is not the cell but the Protit.

One should treat the cause, not the result. The idea of anti-biosis, anti-biotic (anti-life) is one way. The opposite of anti-biosis is PRO-BIOSIS (for-life), which is what Eclectic Medicine is about. It's not "alternative", it's Eclectic. "Alternative medicine" is just a popular anachronism for Eclectic. None of this is new and it isn't alternative.

As these "little dots", Protits, change form, they can change into organisms that are more and more detrimental to the body, they become independent and no longer live in harmony and in support of their host body. As they develop their individual form, they create their own metabolism and waste products of that metabolism, which is harmful to the local body fluids, causing pain and inflammation. Finally, this 'local' process, which develops in the body's "weakest organ", effects the Whole body.

It is not the organisms that make you sick, it is the waste products of the metabolism of those organisms that make you sick.

"In reality, it is not the bacteria themselves that produce the disease, but we believe it is the chemical constituents of these microorganisms enacting upon the unbalanced cell metabolism of the human body that in actuality produce the disease. We also believe if the metabolism of the human body is perfectly balanced or poised, it is susceptible to no disease." (from the Annual Report of the Board of Regents of The Smithsonian Institution, 1944, The Rife's Microscope, The Smithsonian Report, 1944).

* * *

These disease processes, these changes in the blood, are difficult to fathom at first as they make themselves known in the beginning as functional disturbances (effecting the functions but not yet the structures of the body) in the most diversified organs such as by;

* headaches,

* high or low blood pressure,

* inability to maintain chiropractic adjustment,

* feeling poorly,

* unmotivated attitude,

* lack of appetite,

* drab complexion,

* coated tongue,

* wounds in the mouth,

* pimples, sores,

* hoarseness,

* runny noses and the like,

* ear noises,

* diarrhea,

* lowered capacity for seeing and hearing,

* depressions,

* weak concentration or poor memory.

Later, these disturbances manifest as the chronic diseases we know so well today.

See How You Rot and Rust by Steve Denk for another discussion on pleomorphism, pH balance, and oxidation/reduction which is another part of this whole process.

Medicines based on these ideas have been available and well researched in <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" /><st1:place w:st="on">Europe</st1:place> for the last 150 years. Many of these medicines are available in this country now. See the Web-site What Is Pleomorphism and Isopathic Homeopathy for a discussion on medicines that are available in the United States now, this because of the heroic work of some very dedicated and wonderful people. There is more known about these older medicines than about modern drugs, simply because these ideas have been around for so long. Just because these scientists lived in the 1800s or before doesn't mean they were stupid The small dots again are the Protits, the large white rings, red blood cells.

The long organisms in the middle of the slides are bacterial forms that the Protits have turned into. Modern Biology claims this is not so, even though it is there for anyone to see.

Pleomorphism is a concept that today sounds very strange. What pleomorphism is, however, cannot be denied as the vast amount of data that has been obtained over the last 180 years confirms what modern microbiologists are discovering, re-covering today. As noted, many people have been involved in this debate for a long time. Why things are like this is explained in the topic History on the Home Page. We will cover the main progenitors of this idea beginning with Günther Enderlein.

[bhaktajan]

How you rot and rust

Fortunately there have been and are today scientists who have continued along the other road - the road ignored by Pasteur. They have continued the pleomorphic line of research with great veracity, though it is largely suppressed and unknown in the United States.

The American medical establishment does not look at live blood. Their practice of staining blood with chemicals kills it. It also kills the ability to really "see" what is going on. But in looking at live blood, you can clearly "see" that there are bacteria, microorganisms and parasites that not only are in the blood, but that over time can grow and can change their shapes.

Research has proven that they can become pathogenic (disease producing). This ability of microorganisms to change is the concept of pleomorphism we've been discussing. Understanding this concept is essential to the understanding of cancer and its cure, and the cure of many other diseases.

American Medical Establishment does not look at live blood.

Looking at live blood under a microscope is an incredible learning tool and begins an incredible journey whereby we come to understand that there are living, creepy crawly organisms that live in the environment of our blood.

These are the microorganisms and parasites that truly constitute "the fungus among us."

 

DARKFIELD MICROSCOPY

Today, researchers who look for organisms in live blood use standard laboratory microscopes with high magnification that are specially set up to view the blood under "darkfield" or "phase contrast" conditions. With darkfield this means that the blood sample being viewed is actually in front of a dark background and light is being angled onto the blood sample from the sides. Under phase contrast conditions, the light coming through the specimen is shifted into two beams, one slightly out of phase with the other. These techniques allow nearly invisible micro-organisms within the blood to be "lit up" and seen. They also clearly delineate the blood cells. This method is in contrast to the standard microscope "brightfield" conditions where light shines directly through the viewed sample.

 

Using this kind of microscope technology, German bacteriologist Guenther Enderlein (a student of Bechamp) discovered tiny micro-organisms which he called protits. These tiny micro-organisms flourished in the blood cells, in the plasma body fluids, and in the tissues, living in harmony with the body in a symbiotic or mutually beneficial relationship. He considered the protit as one of the body's smallest, organized, biological units.

The most interesting thing about this micro-organism is its ability to change and adapt to its environment. It was observed that when there was severe change or deterioration in the body's internal environment (mostly noted by changes in pH), these microorganisms would pass through several different stages of cyclic development, advancing from harmless agents to disease producing (pathological) bacteria or fungi.

His book 'The Life Cycle of Bacteria' (Bakterian Cyclogenie) presented his theory. From his research he was able to produce natural biological answers to many of the degenerative disease processes plaguing western civilization today.

[bhaktajan]

The Pioneering Microbiology of Guenther Enderlein

Protits - Flourish in the blood cells, plasma body fluids, tissues.

The body's smallest organised biological unit. It can change and adopt to its environment.

Other researchers have continued along the path blazed by Enderlein and have come to similar findings. Gaston Naessens discovered the protit and watched its life cycle. He calls the protit a "somatid".

Naessens believes this protit/somatid predates DNA and carries on genetic activity. It is the first thing that condenses from light energy, and is the link between light and matter.

Virginia Livingston-Wheeler also researched the protit but called it "progenitor cryptocides." Progenitor, meaning it existed through millennia, and cryptocides being a cellular killer - essentially the ancestral hidden killer, cancer. Like Naessens, <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" /><st1:place w:st="on">Livingston</st1:place> did some excellent cancer research.

Some of her best research was done along with two other women, Eleanor Alexander-Jackson and Irene Diller. They referred to this microbe as the cancer microbe. But in truth it is much more than that.

From all indications, Enderlein laid out some of the best and most original findings and others took his lead and furthered the research. Unfortunately, many scientists work in isolation and for one reason or another a lot of information known by one is unknown by the others. Because information is not shared, or given hierarchical credit, many who follow are left in the dark and without the full picture.

Blood is under pH control

Ideal around 7.3

If blood shifts outside the "perfect" range, the micro-organisms in the blood (protits) must change in order to survive.

1000's of forms - overcome defense mechanisms - multiple disease situations.

Remember that blood is under pH control. Ideally it has a pH in a narrow range around 7.3, which is slightly alkaline. pH around 7.3 is the perfect environment in which the protit lives in harmony with the body. But when blood pH is disturbed and is shifted out of that narrow range, these tiny micro-organisms can no longer live.

In order to survive, they will change to a form which can survive. It is these new forms that can become aggressive, parasitic and pathogenic agents within the blood.

Dr. Enderlein contended there are thousands of forms and many of these are able to overcome the body's defense mechanisms, causing multiple disease situations.

[bhaktajan]

Some Call it the Kleptic Microbe

Darkfield microscopic studies conducted by Dr. Rudolph Alsleben and Dr. Kurt Donsbach of the Hospital Santa Monica clearly illustrated the proliferation of mutated microorganisms in the blood of their sick patients. What they observed was the dance of these microbes in their pathogenic rage. They called it the 'kleptic microbe'. Examining their patients live blood revealed many of these microbes darting to and fro in the blood plasma. The more ill the patient, the more microbes observed. The sickest patients had swarming hordes of these parasitic mutated microorganisms within the blood, causing great stress to their immune systems. The doctors learned that cleaning the blood of these kleptic microbes allowed the rejuvenation of the immune system to progress in an orderly and rapid fashion.

Curious scientists who spend a lot of time in the laboratory looking at live blood under the microscope often start to wonder about the pleomorphic concept. When they see the changes in the blood taking place and correlate it with the progression of the disease process, many begin to see a pattern unfolding that prompts them to state that...

The over-acidification of the body, caused by an inverted way of eating and living, causes a proliferation of the "fungus among us" which debilitates the body and, if not corrected, will ultimately cause our demise.

Looked at in this light it could be said that all illness is but this one constitutional disease, the result is mycotoxicoses - toxicity caused by mycotic infection, or in other words, by a yeast and fungus infection. These are the great decomposers of living and dead bodies. From ashes to ashes and dust to dust, this is nature's decomposing mechanism at work.

Fascinating isn't it? If you begin to understand this concept, you will begin to understand a prime reason why we get sick and how we get sick, and you will realize that much of modern medicine is looking under the wrong stones for answers to many disease questions.

For years now, medicine has considered blood to be a sterile environment. But they're wrong. Unfortunately, dead wrong for some of their patients.

Blood is not a sterile environment, nor is it a static environment. That environment can change (most notably through diet) and microorganisms in the blood can evolve and change too. The fact is, we can see this type of evolution and change going on throughout all of nature.

If you leave a bowl of milk out on the kitchen table for a few days without refrigeration, it will turn sour fairly quickly. Did it turn sour because there was an outside germ that got into the milk? No it did not. It turned sour because tiny microbes already in the milk changed their form to adapt to a changed environment.

The Disease Paradigm Shift

One school of thought (modern medicine and the monomorphic perspective) says most disease is caused by germs or some form of static, disease-causing microbe (the germ theory). In order to get well, you should KILL the germs. KILL the microbes. KILL whatever is making you sick. Drugs, antibiotics, chemotherapy, radiation, surgery.

The other school of thought (which encompasses most other forms of the healing arts unrelated to mainstream medicine) says most disease is caused by some unbalance in the body. The unbalance occurs in some nutritional, electrical, structural, toxicological or biological equation. In order to get well, you need to re-establish balance in your body by working with your body, not against it.

For the pleomorphic scientists like Enderlein, Naessens, Livingston, and others, disease is in large measure a function of biology. It is a biologically driven event that takes place in the body when metabolic processes are thrown off. These metabolic processes are thrown off largely by dietary, nutritional and environmental factors.

Embracing the biological view gives new insights into the disease process and is truly another paradigm for understanding health.

[bhaktajan]

For some researchers, it all boils down to this...

Mycrozyma

HEALTH & SURVIVAL IN THE 21st CENTURY

"Before Bechamp's time the theory of the cell being the basic unit of life was well established, but Bechamp's investigations showed that the cell itself was made up of smaller living entities capable of intelligent behavior and self-reproduction. He referred to these as 'molecular granulations' and gave them the name of microzymas, which he said were the real basic units of life.

Monomorphism vs Pleomorphism

"Bechamp described how in certain conditions microzymas could develop into bacteria within a cell and could, if the right conditions persisted, become pathological, so that infection could develop in the body without the acquisition of the germ from an outside source.

These observations supported the belief of Professor Claude Bernard (1813-78), who contended that no matter where germs came from they presented a danger only if the body was in a run-down state due to a disturbed milieu interieur."

"Because other researchers without Bechamp's finesse, had not observed the changes in form capable by various microbes, it was believed in orthodox circles that each form of the same microbe, at the time it was observed, was an entirely different microbe in its own right which remained always the same.

Thus as the 19th Century came to a close, two schools of thought existed: pleomorphism as propounded by Bechamp and Ernst Almquist (1852-1946) of <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" /><st1:country-region w:st="on">Sweden</st1:country-region>, and monomorphism as propounded by Pasteur and Robert Koch* (1843-1910) of <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Germany</st1:place></st1:country-region>.

"About this time <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:country-region w:st="on">Germany</st1:country-region></st1:place> became predominant in world medical research, and because the germ theory of disease had become firmly entrenched in the minds of orthodox doctors, the research into microbiology became focused more on medical problems than on the general study of biology."

<?xml:namespace prefix = v ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" /><v:shapetype id=_x0000_t75 stroked="f" filled="f" path="m@4@5l@4@11@9@11@9@5xe" o:preferrelative="t" o:spt="75" coordsize="21600,21600"><v:stroke joinstyle="miter"></v:stroke><v:formulas><v:f eqn="if lineDrawn pixelLineWidth 0"></v:f><v:f eqn="sum @0 1 0"></v:f><v:f eqn="sum 0 0 @1"></v:f><v:f eqn="prod @2 1 2"></v:f><v:f eqn="prod @3 21600 pixelWidth"></v:f><v:f eqn="prod @3 21600 pixelHeight"></v:f><v:f eqn="sum @0 0 1"></v:f><v:f eqn="prod @6 1 2"></v:f><v:f eqn="prod @7 21600 pixelWidth"></v:f><v:f eqn="sum @8 21600 0"></v:f><v:f eqn="prod @7 21600 pixelHeight"></v:f><v:f eqn="sum @10 21600 0"></v:f></v:formulas><v:path o:connecttype="rect" gradientshapeok="t" o:extrusionok="f"></v:path><o:lock aspectratio="t" v:ext="edit"></o:lock></v:shapetype><v:shape id=_x0000_i1025 style="WIDTH: 450pt; HEIGHT: 7.5pt" alt="" type="#_x0000_t75"><v:imagedata o:href=" " src="file:///C:\DOCUME~1\jtrapani\LOCALS~1\Temp\msohtml1\01\clip_image001.gif"></v:imagedata></v:shape>

Monomorphism

Monomorphism is the cornerstone of Robert Koch (1843-1910) and Louis Pasteur's (1822-1895) Germ Theory of disease. This theory professes that disease has a microbial cause that is "caught" from the outside;

"that there are differences among pathogenic bacteria (ones that can make you ill), and each has a constant nature ... each distinct bacterial form corresponds to a specific disease and that the form of this microbe always stays the same - monomorphism, and causes the same disease however often the disease is transferred from one animal to another, the kind always remains the same and never changes into other kinds". How You Rot and Rust by Steve Denk

In 1878 Robert Koch wrote Etiology of Wound Infections which was the beginning of the Germ Theory of Disease. Where Pasteur's views were shaped by the study of fermentation, Koch was affected by his contact with wounded soldiers.

He noted that the bodies of animals that die of artificially infected wound diseases (pus from an infected animal injected into a healthy one) invariably contained many bacteria ... In each case a definite organism corresponded to a distinct disease ... and that for every individual, traumatic, infective disease, a morphologically distinguishable microorganism could be identified.

In 1880 Koch built on an essay of the relations between microbial diseases and their causes from the work of Jacob Henle, his professor of anatomy. These became known as the>Koch-Henle Postulates.

The following are these postulates which revolutionized medical epidemiology at the turn of the century, by laying out the standard proof of infectivity to the present day. The postulates dictate that a microbe must be:

1. found in an animal (or person) with the disease,

2. isolated and grown in culture and

3. injected into a healthy experimental animal, producing the disease in question; and then recovered from the experimentally diseased animal and shown to be the same pathogen as the original.

* * *

By the early twentieth century the whole landscape of medicine had changed. Most of the common killer diseases, including smallpox, diphtheria, bubonic plague, flu, whooping cough, yellow fever, and TB, were understood to be caused by pathogens. Vaccines were devised against some, and by the 1950s antibiotics could easily cure many others.

By the 1960s and 1970s the prevailing mood was one of optimism. At least in the developed world, infectious diseases no longer seemed very threatening. Far more scary were the diseases that the medical world said were not infectious: heart disease, cancer, diabetes, and so on. That these diseases are now considered to be "infectious" (See Atlantic Monthly, A New Germ Theory, February 1999) , is what this web page is about.

Also, no one foresaw the devastation of AIDS, or the serial outbreaks of deadly new infections such as Legionnaire's disease, Ebola and <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:City w:st="on">Marburg</st1:City></st1:place> hemorrhagic fevers, antibiotic-resistant tuberculosis, "flesh-eating" staph infections, and Rift Valley fever.

"The infectious age is, we now know, far from over. Furthermore, it appears that many diseases we didn't think were infectious may be caused by infectious agents after all. These include stomach ulcers, heart disease.

The first cancer virus discovered in 1910 called the Rous sarcoma virus, certain leukemias, lymphomas, nasopharyngeal cancer common in south China, cervical cancer, stomach cancer, liver cancer, Kaposi's sarcoma with Herpes virus 8, mammary-gland tumors in mice, childhood obsessive compulsive disorder, Sydenhams's chorea which is a rare complication of streptococcal infection. Streptococcal antibodies find their way into the brain and attack a region called the basal ganglia, causing characteristic clumsiness along with obsessions. Schizophrenia has long been considered to be possibly "infectious" in nature."

 

The Atlantic Monthly, A New Germ Theory by Judith Hooper, February 1999, pg. 44.

The catalogue of suspected chronic diseases caused by "infection"/bacteria to David A Relman, an assistant professor of medicine, microbiology, and immunology at <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:PlaceName w:st="on">Stanford</st1:PlaceName> <st1:PlaceType w:st="on">University</st1:PlaceType></st1:place>, now includes;

"sarcoidosis, various forms of inflammatory bowel disease, rheumatoid arthritis, lupus, Wegener's granulomatosis, diabetes mellitus, primary biliary cirrhosis, tropical sprue, and Kawasaki disease. Likely suspects include many forms of heart disease, arteriosclerosis, Alzheimers's disease, most major psychiatric diseases, Hashimoto's thyroiditis, cerebral palsy, polycystic ovarian disease, and perhaps obesity and certain eating disorders. Multiple sclerosis has been linked to the human herpes virus 6, the agent of Roseola infantum, a very mild disease of childhood" (ibid.)

[bhaktajan]

Where do these bacteria come from...?

To modern science, this is still an unanswered question.

* * *

Regarding stomach ulcers;

In 1981 Barry J. Marshall became interested in incidences of spiral bacteria in the stomach lining. The bacteria were assumed to be irrelevant to ulcer pathology, but Marshall and J. R. Warren noticed, serendipitously, that when one patient was treated with tetracycline for unrelated reason, his pain vanished, and in endoscopy, revealed the ulcer was gone.

An article by Marshall and Warren on their culturing of "unidentified curved bacilli" appeared in the British medical journal, The Lancet in 1984. No one listened until finally <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" /><st1:place w:st="on"><st1:City w:st="on">Marshall</st1:City></st1:place> personally ingested a batch of the spiral bacteria and came down with painful gastritis, thereby fulfilling all of Koch's postulates.

There is now little doubt that Helicobacter pylori, found in the stomachs of a third of adults in the <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:country-region w:st="on">United States</st1:country-region></st1:place>, cause inflammation of the stomach lining. In 20 percent of infected people it produces and ulcer, Nearly everyone with a duodenal ulcer is infected. H. pylori infections can be readily diagnosed with endoscopic biopsy tests, a blood test for antibodies, or a breath test. In 90 percent of cases the infections can be cured in less than a month with antibiotics.

* * *

Where do these bacteria come from?

You don't "catch" them, so infectious is not the correct word.

* * *

Regarding arteriosclerosis;

It has recently been discovered that arteriosclerosis is also a bacterial process. Notice I did not say, 'caused by bacteria'. The plaques of 99% of patients with hardening of the arteries have the bacteria Chlamydia pneumoniae in them.

According to The Atlantic Monthly, Feb. 1999, Chlamydia pneumoniae is a newly discovered bacterium that causes pneumonia and bronchitis. The germ is a relative of Chlamydia trachomatis, which cause trachoma, a leading cause of blindness in parts of the <st1:place w:st="on">Third World</st1:place>. C. trachomatisis perhaps more familiar to us as a sexually transmitted disease that, left untreated in women, can lead to scarring of the fallopian tubes.

Pekka Saikku and Maija Leinonen of <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:country-region w:st="on">Finland</st1:country-region></st1:place> discovered the new type of chlamydial infection in 1985 though its existence was not officially recognized until 1989. Saikku and Leinonen found that 68 percent of Finnish patients who had suffered heart attacks had high levels of antibodies to C. pneumoniae, as did 50 percent of patients with coronary heart disease, in contrast to 17 percent of the healthy controls.

While examining coronary-artery tissues at autopsy in 1991, Allan Shor, a pathologist in <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:City w:st="on">Johannesburg</st1:City></st1:place>, saw "pear-shaped bodies" that looked like nothing he had seen before. Cho-Chou Kuo, of the University of Washington School of Public Health, found that the clogged arteries were full of C. pneumoniae.

Everywhere the bacterium lodges, it appears to precipitate the same grim sequence of events: a chronic inflammation, followed by a buildup of plaque that occludes the opening of the artery (or, in the case of venereal Chlamydia, a buildup of scar tissue in the fallopian tube).

Recently a team of pathologists at MCP-Hahnemann School of Medicine, found the same bacterium in the diseased section of the autopsied brains of seventeen out of nineteen Alzheimer's patents and in only one of nineteen controls.

Whether antibiotics help any of these diseases or not remains to be seen. The first major clinical trial is under way in the <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:country-region w:st="on">United States</st1:country-region></st1:place>, sponsored by the National Institutes of Health and the Pfizer Corporation: 4000 heart patients at twenty-seven clinical centers will be given either the antibiotic azithromycin or a placebo and followed for four years to gauge whether the antibiotic affects the incidence of further coronary events.

Whether the antibiotic helps coronary heart disease or not does not explain where these bacteria come from and thereby how to effect a causal or real cure. That this issue of Chlamydia in the tissues, is still being pursued by the modern pharmaceutical firms as "infectious" in nature, amenable to the treatment with antibiotics and/or vaccines, is an another example of how entrenched Pasteur's and Koch's ideas are in the whole of medicine from the profit orientation of the petro-chemical pharmaceutical companies on down.

The above reference to the article from The Atlantic Monthly, does add to its credit,

"Even if heart patients can be shown to have antibodies to C. pneumoniae, and even if colonies of the bacteria are found living and breeding in diseased coronary arteries, is it certain that the germ caused the damage? Perhaps it is there as an innocent bystander, as some critics have proposed."

As will be shown, the above bacteria, Chlamydia pneumoniae and Helicobacter pylori come out the red blood cells themselves The blood is teaming with microorganisms, especially if it sits on the microscope slide for a few hours. You can watch this process under any microscope, anywhere, anytime.

* * *

This is a funny situation really. Modern, allopathicly trained physicians <can't see these things, literally. You can see all these organisms in the blood with any microscope, so its not a matter of "seeing is believing". More, it's a mater of "believing is seeing", so you can even dare to take a look in the first place.

In summary:

1. The blood is not sterile, as we were led to believe after the Second World War with Hitler's ideology of the creation of a 'pure' blooded race.

2. The cell is not the smallest living thing.

3. Organisms come of the blood and tissues to decompose those tissues when they can no longer live and support their own metabolism within the environment they find themselves in, in their internal milieu.

4. These same organisms can also come out of the blood and regenerate new tissues and organs; depends on which way we want to go. One needs a source of Protits in the diet, organ meats provide these, organ specific Protits/Somatides. (See Live Cell Therapy )

[Guest Melvin1]

Bhaktajan, milk used to be the treatment for peptic ulcer disease but it`s no longer recommended by doctors because the calcium content in milk only stimulates the stomach to secrete more hydrochloric acid. So, if you are regularly fasting and milk is the only food your taking chances are you`ll get a stomach ulcer. To prevent this from happening take in advance an antacid ( aluminum magnesium hydroxide)

[sant]

but milk is the purest sattvic food

[sant]

do you get ulcer with milk?

i have it everyday

[bhaktajan]

Sant, I am a shameless milkaholic --I should seek help but I will not.

 

Do you drink milk always warm?

 

Ayurveda says it should not be drunk cold--is this correct? Why?

 

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::;

Sir Melvin,

Calcium is an alkaline mineral. So, Magnesium is also an alkaline mineral.

Both will calm acids.

 

I do not yet know the veracity of your statement, so i'll not reply.

 

The main posting here are my reason to be confident that the new wave in human Biology will be the self maintanence of proper pH.

 

Acidic polution in the body is easy to track --if one cared to be ahead of the trends.

[sant]

thanks for telling heres a linki never heard this before but

http://www.mapi.com/ayurveda_health_care/newsletters/ayurveda_&_milk.html

The Ayurvedic View on Drinking Milk

 

According to ayurveda, milk provides special and unique nutrition that cannot be derived from any other type of food. Milk, when digested properly, nourishes all the tissues, promotes balanced emotions, and helps to balance all the doshas. It is one of the most important foods to promote ojas.

According to ayurveda, ojas is a refined substance the body produces from the most subtle level of proper digestion. Ojas brings strength, strong immunity, happiness, and contentment according to Ayurveda. Therefore milk is a very important food to include regularly in one's diet especially if you follow a vegetarian lifestyle.

In order to digest milk properly, one should avoid drinking cold milk right out of the refrigerator. Milk should be brought to a boil. Allow the milk to foam up and then bring the heat down so the milk is on a slow boil for about 5 to 10 minutes. Heating the milk changes the molecular structure of the milk so it is much easier for human consumption and it reduces kapha, making it lighter to digest. While cooking it you may add a pinch of ground turmeric, a pinch of ground black pepper, a cinnamon stick, or a few pinches of ginger to reduce the heaviness of the milk and reduce any mucous causing side effect.

 

 

 

cant tell you the genuity of this

[sant]

<TABLE style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify" cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=572 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD align=middle width=572 colSpan=6 height=10>

 

Milk Diet

 

</TD></TR><TR><TD width=572 colSpan=6 height=10></TD></TR><TR><TD width=572 bgColor=#b42328 colSpan=6 height=2></TD></TR><TR><TD width=572 colSpan=6 height=10></TD></TR><TR><TD width=572 colSpan=6 height=10>Milk should be scalded but not too much boiled. The process of scalding is that the milk should be immediately removed from the fire as soon as the boiling point is reached. Too much boiling destroys the vitamins, the mysterious nutritive principles and renders it quite useless as an article of diet. Milk is a perfect food by itself, containing as it does, the different nutritive constituents in a well-balanced proportion. It leaves very little residue in the bowels. This is an ideal food for Yogic students during Pranayama practice. </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

[bhaktajan]

So many others postings attesting to this Topic as becoming more widely understood.

 

That is good news for the Public and bad news for pharmaceutical manufacturers.

[sudep21]

hey u r very correct on what u say

one of my friends in ayurveda says if we discover how to properly purify blood that will work anti ageing

sudeep

 

 

PAMHO,

Acid--Alkaline Connection to Health

Prabhujis,

I think I stumbled onto the Rosetta stone of health Problems and thus,

a way of grounding the need to be vegetarian-- all under one heading.

Upon more closer analysis it would seem that the balance between "Acid &

Alkaline (ph)" constitutions in the body are the basis for predicting illness.

Once upon a time vitamins were unknown; cigarettes were advertised by doctors; coke-cola contained cocaine; calorie restriction was relegated to doctors; "Low-Carbohydrates" replaced "Low-Fat" intake monitoring; allergies were about pollen & sneezing; inflammation was about pimples and Bee stings —now this data on Acid-Alkaline PH will be the basis to enlighten the public and medical personnel as to how bad eating habits cause acids and acidic results in the body via PH levels (pH means "potential to release Hydrogen" molecules)—all within the lexicon of the established medical establishment.

I predict that all common discussions regarding maintaining proper health will move into a newly praised field of "Acid vs Alkaline Content in the Body." ---[though I am a novice to the chemistry of the human body---the rules of Ayur-veda & pranayama breathing & control of the tongue are part and parcel to awareness of how Acids affect the body, mind & societal karma].

I realize that my above writing is too general and flowery to explain what I found in this literature---so in lieu of getting the entire book posted for all to see, I ask you to research this subject.

ys,

Bhaktajan

Nov. 15, 2007

[ishap]

yogurt kefir cocoonut biotic all fermented are good for yeast and fungi. these probiotics fights them. i think it depends on individual body type.people with low hcl and yeast need fermented foods to maintain bowel regularity.