On 13 Nov 02, Moen Creek wrote: > By the by your belief is miss guided. Your own germs recycling through > you will be destructive and could account for "chem" sensitivities. > > Thank you Gil, your right on!
I wonder! 8-7 It is a while since I regularly monitored the newsgroup <misc.health.alternative> on Usenet - it has degenerated into a rabble! Dr C endured the brick-bats for months and I saved several of his posts because they added considerably to a train of intuition I've had for many years. Below is a cut 'n paste of one his posts. Gaston Naessens is a notable modern day pleomorphic/orthopathic researcher. For background on Naessens see (et seq): http://www.ralphmoss.com/html/naessens1.shtml Cheerio... Rex ---Cut 'n paste begins--- From: drceephd@... (DRCEEPHD) Newsgroups: misc.health.alternative Date: 31 Mar 2001 20:02:35 GMT Subject: Re: Branches of the Hygienic System This question is rather like the chicken and the egg. Which came first? Thanks for the references. I note that the scientists are still trying to determine how the Salmonella bacteria get into the egg and cause it to rot. We are still trying to figure out how the bacteria get through the egg shell, the protective membranes, and the other protective factors in the egg to cause it to rot rather than form a chicken. I find this interesting since the answer was provided very nicely in 1870. In Bechamp's research he discovered that the smallest unit of life in the living organism was not the cell, nor bacteria, but "little bodies" which he named microzymas. He found these microzymas in all living matter, both plant and animal. He further determined that upon death of a living organism, it was the microzymas that caused the total destruction of the organism to return it to the soil for recycling while the microzymas themselves continued to live. He also measured and published the size of the microzymas. He found that these basic life units were nearly immortal, and resistant to destruction even when heated to "carbonizing temperatures." Kind of reminds you of a prion, doesn't it? His research on the rotting of the egg is a further proof of his general theory. He found that the microzymas assist in the normal life functions, but when the conditions for life, or the production of life, are destroyed, the microzymas set about conducting the destruction of the organism while perpetuating their own kind. Thus, in a healthy egg, you wind up with a chicken. When you shake the egg, destroying the possibility of life formation, the microzymas proliferate and even form a higher life form to assist in the destruction of the egg, the salmonella. As you can see from this work and this theory, it is not necessary for salmonella to enter the egg through the shell, they will be formed by the microzymas within the interior of the egg. All this, of course, runs counter current to "modern" guess work, and proves that the germ theory of an egg rotting is just as false as the overall "germ theory of disease." If Bechamp could see all this with his microscope, I would have to believe that you, armed with a modern microscope and darkfield equipment, should be better able to see the same thing. You cannot see these things viewing dead, stained specimens. Dr. C. Ph.D. Sit down before fact as a child. Be prepared to give up every pre-conceived notion. Follow humbly where nature leads, or learn nothing at all. Thomas Huxley. ---Cut 'n paste ends---
