Archive for July, 2009


Written by Janine Roberts

Edited excerpts from “Fear of the Invisible”


In 2004 the UK government headlined: ‘Recent increases in new HIV diagnoses have been largely driven by infections acquired through heterosexual intercourse’. And yet the small print of the same government report stated; ‘Men-having-sex-with-men (MSM) remain the group at greatest risk of acquiring HIV infection within the UK, accounting for an estimated 84% of infections diagnosed in 2003 that were likely to have been acquired in the UK’ – and, out of 6,606 new cases of ‘HIV infection in 2003, only 43 cases were among heterosexual or lesbian women born in the UK, and only 57 cases among UK born heterosexual men! That is right – in an entire year, there were only 43 new HIV cases among women born in the UK – and 57 among UK heterosexual men! Since a person with a fungal infection or recent flu jab can falsely test positive for HIV, this simply is not enough cases to sustain an epidemic.

The numbers of deaths listed in AIDS statistics are also not what they seem. They are not ‘deaths from AIDS’, as one might be forgiven for presuming. The small print reveals these are ‘deaths among the HIV-infected,’ leaving open the actual cause of death. This makes these figures not only highly misleading, but meaningless. Likewise in 1997 the CDC acknowledged that: ‘Reported deaths [on CDC AIDS statistics tables] are not necessarily caused by HIV-related diseases!’

So how do the UK health authorities justify saying that heterosexual and female cases are greatly increasing? Solely by adding African immigrants ‘presumed infected in Africa.’ It is among them that are found nearly all the heterosexual and female cases of ‘AIDS’. But, why? (On Africa – please read the separate article)

Continue reading on Janine’s site: Fear of the Invisible.


Read Full Post »

From Introduction to the Book.

Fear of the Invisible

PDF Print E-mail
Written by Janine Roberts

Virology – the misnamed Science

The word ‘virus’ comes from the Latin for a poisonous liquid, and before that from the Sanskrit for the same. The hunt for them started when, towards the end of the 19th century, it was suggested that invisible living particles much smaller than bacteria might cause the epidemic illnesses for which no bacterial cause could be found. When the electron microscope found tiny particles in the blood serum of patients entering and leaving human cells, this was a Eureka Moment.  The prediction was surely about to be proved true.  These particles were assumed to be invading and hijacking our cells in order to reproduce. They were thus all condemned as poisons, as ‘viruses.’

As more of these were searched for and found in sick people, many illnesses became blamed on them.  They became the invisible enemy, the nano-terrorist we must fear. We were instructed that one of our first duties for our newborn children is to vaccinate them against this dreaded foe.  Thus was created an ever-growing multibillion-dollar pharmaceutical industry.

But, as I have travelled through the science that underlies this industry, I have gradually learnt to ask questions. I now realise that there is another way to see this story that fits all the data. I have learnt from biologists that our cells naturally produce viral-like particles without being invaded or infected, both when healthy and sick. Currently such particles are named by asking what illnesses they cause as if this is their raison d’être, their only importance, the sole reason for cells making them. They would be named far more positively and comprehensively by asking what cells produce them and for what purpose.

Scientists like Barbara McClintock, who won a Nobel Prize for finding that cells operate with intelligence and seek to repair themselves, have given us a very different understanding of the particles they make. We now know that our cells create multitudes of tiny transport particles (vesicles) to carry the proteins and genetic codes needed within and between cells. The ones that travel between cells, those our cells use to communicate with each other – are puzzlingly just like those that we have long blamed for illnesses.

It now seems that we may have broadly misconceived the virus; that they may be simply inert messages in envelopes carried from cell to cell.  In the last ten years scientists have begun to call them instead ‘exosomes‘, ‘particles that leave the body’ of the cell, thus removing the inference that they are all poisons.  Distinguishing the healthy particle from the pathogenic is now an enormous problem for the virologist, for it has been discovered that our cells make them all in the same way, in the very same place.  It also seems we cannot stop this process without risking severely damaging our cells.

So, perhaps we need to halt the juggernaut of virology with its virus hunt, and look to see if there is another way of helping us keep healthy. We need to know how we can strengthen the malnourished cell, rather than use the many medicines that try to prevent it from making particles by interfering with its essential processes. We need to know if a poisoned cell may produce unhealthy messengers or viruses.  We need to learn far more about cells – for only now are we starting to understand how they communicate and the very important role played in this by the particles we had totally demonised as viruses.

I spent over 4 years in the 1990s researching why the vaccines made to protect our children from viruses sometimes instead did them grievous damage.  It then took me over 8 years to travel from accepting without question that a virus causes polio and another causes AIDS to discover that most people, including myself, have been vastly misled.

I now realize that science today is so specialized, that every new generation of scientists has had to trust that those who laid the foundations got things right, for they cannot repeat this earlier work except at great cost. If this trust ever proves to be misplaced, it is absolutely vital to correct this with all speed and courage.

I have been horrified to learn from the highest scientific authorities that this trust has sometimes been very grievously misplaced. For example, high-level US governmental inquiries in the 1990s, guided by eminent scientists, explicitly reported the key foundation HIV research papers were riddled with grave errors and deceptively “fixed.” They documented these findings with great care – and I likewise do so here. But when the Republican Party gained control over the US House of Representatives at the end of 1994, it ended this most important investigation, buried its reports and left the scientific papers it found to be erroneous uncorrected. These same papers are thus still frequently used by unsuspecting scientists worldwide, who cite them as proof that HIV causes AIDS. I present clear evidence here that these papers were fixed at the last moment before publication. I also reproduce the original documents so you can judge for yourselves.

When I dug back further, to the origins of virology and the great hunt for the poliovirus, I found the story was scandalously much the same. Powerful evidence was presented to Congress linking the summer polio epidemics to summer-used heavy metal pesticides. These scientists suggested remedies, reported curing polio – and were ignored. Instead parents were told to be scared of a yet undiscovered virus. Today thousands of children are still being identically paralysed in regions where such pesticides are heavily used – but all the World Health Organisation (WHO) says is: ‘Don’t worry; we have nearly exterminated the dreaded poliovirus. We have checked. The paralysed children were not infected by it.’

As for childhood vaccinations, surely they have proved a great benefit?  I long thought so, but I have found the government scientists we entrust with our children’s lives have admitted, at official vaccine safety meetings reported here for the first time, that they cannot clean these vaccines; that they allowed their use despite knowing that they are scandalously polluted with numerous viruses, viral and genetic code fragments, possibly toxins, prions and oncogenes. The World Health Organisation has also disclosed at these meetings that it has long known that the MMR vaccine to be contaminated with avian leucosis virus. This is a bird virus linked to leukaemia, but the public have not been told about this.  Why most children are not falling ill from this dangerous contamination is, it seems, because most are thankfully gifted by nature with very effective immune systems – and because these viruses are generally not as dangerous as these scientists believe.

As for the great flu‘ epidemic of 1918, it is used today to spread fear of viruses. Yet, shortly after it occurred, an eminent Yale University professor reported that bacteria primarily caused it, and the flu viruses present were virtually harmless. As far as I can discover, his work remains unquestioned but not mentioned. I thus report it in this book. As for the recent scare over bird flu – any self-respecting bird would fall ill and create new viruses if subjected to the amounts of pollution now emitted in China. What we need to focus on is the pollution – not to waste a fortune on chasing genetic code fragments in birds healthily migrating thousands of miles.

What also of the many eminent scientists who have concluded publicly that the HIV theory of AIDS must be scientifically flawed because their research indicates that it has other causes and is curable?  Is it right that their research is being suppressed, ridiculed and not funded – simply because they have not confirmed the establishment’s theory for this dreaded epidemic?  At the end of this book I list some of their names and positions.

Among these dissenters are at least one Nobel Laureate and many senior professors at major universities. But it seems, no matter how important the academic chairs they hold, they are all mocked for so concluding and are scarcely ever interviewed. Instead they are scandalously called ‘Denialists,’ as if they had denied the Nazi Holocaust, on the basis that their work dissuades people from taking antiretroviral chemotherapy drugs  – which logically cannot be lifesaving, despite all claims, if a retrovirus is not to be blamed.

I have to ask what are the consequences of this uncritical adherence to the theory of HIV?   So far this theory has produced no cure and no vaccine despite the spending of some $200 billion on research. So, what if unacknowledged fraud is a major reason for this continual frustration? Is HIV science built upon flawed and fraudulent research? As for Robert Gallo, the first scientist awarded the credit for discovering HIV; it seems he may have only escaped criminal prosecution for fraud in developing the HIV test on a technicality; because it was found by a State Attorney General that too much time had elapsed for his prosecution to be undertaken.

As for AIDS in Africa, journalists rarely check how AIDS is diagnosed in that continent. Most logically presume it is diagnosed the same as in the West.  But, if they had checked, they would have learnt that World Health Organisation has set very different criteria for an AIDS diagnosis in Africa – explicitly stating that AIDS can be diagnosed solely on the basis of symptoms common to other major diseases! Thus many diseases can be and are diagnosed as AIDS in Africa. I cite these remarkable diagnostic rules in full in this book so you can judge this for yourselves.

If the dissenting scientists were right, if we wrongly fear a sexually transmitted virus, this discovery would have an enormous impact around the world and especially in Africa. It would cause a vast uplifting of the spirits of its people, far greater than anything achieved by “Alive-AID” concerts. We all know how devastating it is for an individual to be told that they are HIV positive and will inevitably die of AIDS. What then does it do to the morale of the people of a continent to be told that they are not only desperately poor but incurably blighted – due to sex?”

We have been taught to greatly fear viruses – and yet scientists have long known that these are fundamental parts of life, made by the millions by all healthy cells.  I hope this book will help by combating this fear, this damning of the invisible because we do not understand it. Without this fear, hopefully the focus in medical research will shift to the environmental toxins that really do put us, and our world, gravely at risk.

As for myself, my work as an investigative journalist previously was on relatively safer subjects for one’s reputation in the liberal press, such as arms for Iran, Aboriginal land rights, blood diamonds. I do not expect such a relatively easy ride this time, given the emotion connected to this issue. Indeed, attempts have already been made to prevent this work appearing, by the same academics who have tried to prevent publicity for the works of the ‘dissident’ scientists, I suppose I should be honoured to be seen so early as a danger by them, even before this book appeared! You can read here verbatim their attacks on my work and judge their validity for yourselves.

But the truth needs to be out.  I hope my account will help to lift the fear with which these natural and fascinating tiny particles have been enshrouded for far too long. They are the products of our cells – and they helped make us.

When I began some twelve years ago my journey into medical research, it took me into the grim world of the virus hunters – but then, utterly unexpectedly, it led to me being utterly enthralled by the marvels of miniscule world of the cell and of its messenger particles or viruses, a world that may well extend across galaxies. I invite you to join me on this journey to meet with our oldest, smallest ancestors, ones whom we are only just now starting to know.

For an example of ‘infection’ used as a criteria, see Retroelement and Retrovirus Universal Classification – Pat Heslop-Harrison. http://www.le.ac.uk/bl/phh4/retrocla.htm

Read Full Post »

Original: Lauana Lei’s Magnetic Clay Baths.

Get The Lead Out.

Government statistics show in the early 1990’s (1994), almost 1.7 MILLION young children had excessively high blood levels of lead. This is almost 9% of all preschool children in the U.S.! ATTENTION DEFICIT DISORDER (ADD) and HYPERACTIVITY have been linked to lead exposure. It is considered very dangerous both because it is so pervasive in our environment and because, like radioisotopes, IT IS A CUMULATIVE POISON!

Unfortunately, early symptoms of lead poisoning, such as nervousness, irritability, headaches, fatigue and general weakness, muscular problems, constipation, and indigestion, are hard to pinpoint as caused by lead. As it continues to accumulate in our bodies, lead creates widespread damage. Its chronic toxicity has been implicated in a sweeping range of physical, mental, and emotional disorders including convulsions, tremors, visual disturbances, mental retardation, twitching of face muscles, jerking of the limbs, to serious degenerative diseases and insanity. For specific diseases associated with lead, call for a copy of the Chart of Diseases referred at the end of this article.

Dr. William Strain, director of the Trace Element Laboratory at Cleveland Metropolitan General Hospital, calls lead pollution “the greatest neuro-toxin (a substance that damages nerves) threat to mankind.” Strain and several other noted scientists cite ample evidence to indicate that lead was a factor that contributed to the fall of both the Greece and Roman Empires. During their heyday, the Greeks and Romans began to smelt and use lead in a variety of ways, which produced wide-ranging and unmanageable physical and behavioral disorders throughout their populations.

According to Dr. Clair Patterson, a geochemist at the California Institute of Technology and a leading lead researcher, the average American has more than one hundred times as much lead in his or her blood as the average person did before smelting began. The lead content of bones is now five hundred to one thousand times higher. Although lead is now found throughout the world and already affects everyone, inhabitants of industrialized nations contain six times the amount of lead in their blood, as do inhabitants of remote areas.

Dr. Ellen K. Silbergeld of the U.S. National Institutes of Health reported to scientists at this meeting, “We know that lead is one of the most ubiquitous and persistent neurotoxins in the environment. The laboratory evidence shows that adverse effects occur at very low levels, but the biochemical bases of lead toxicity do not support the notion that there is any safe threshold for lead exposure.”

After testing 35,504 people, Dr. Emanuel Cheraskin, professor emeritus at the University of Alabama, and Dr. Gary Gordon, Chairman of the Board of the American Academy of Medical Preventics, concluded that more than 38 million Americans are currently being slowly and silently poisoned by lead. According to Dr. J. Blosser, one out of four American men and 10% of American women suffer from lead poisoning. The percentage of women will increase as more enter the workplace, with pregnant women especially at risk.


Children are extremely vulnerable to lead because they absorb 30% to 50% of ingested lead, whereas adults absorb 5% to 10%. According to Blosser, more than 40% of all urban children in America have health problems due to lead poisoning. Lead causes a wide range of disorders in children, including nerve damage, brain dysfunction, skeletal retardation, and behavioral and learning problems. (ADD)

In 1979 Dr. Herbert L. Needleman, professor of pediatrics at Harvard Medical School, reported in the New England Journal of Medicine that every child probably to some degree is affected by lead, and that the threshold for safety has long since been exceeded. The areas of behavior or learning disabilities that Needleman correlated to lead absorption were: lack of ability to follow simple directions and sequences, lack of ability to organize, propensity for daydreaming, distractibility and excitability, a degree of frustration tolerance, hyperactivity, and impulsiveness, lack of ability for independent work and/or persistence with a task, and in a general lack of being able to function well.


Lead can be both ingested and inhaled. Common sources of lead pollution are the 1,300,000 to 1,400,000 tons of lead used annually to make such products as solders, the anti-knock substance in leaded gasoline, batteries, pottery, pigments, smelting, fabricating lead, and burning leaded gasoline exposes workers to high lead levels, and releases more than 600,000 tons of lead into our atmosphere each year, which we routinely inhale. We also ingest it after it has settled on our food crops and in our water supply. Moreover, as researcher L.R. Ember notes, “Food could also be contaminated by lead from the solder in tin cans, pesticide sprays, and cooking utensils. In older homes, where the plumbing consists of lead pipes and the water is acidic and low in mineral content, lead may leach into the water supplies. Weathering of lead-laden paint and putty in older homes contaminates dust with lead, which can be inhaled or ingested; chipping, peeling, and flaking paint in these homes may offer a child a tempting but dangerous morsel.”

Patterson’s research group reports that the standard tin-plated can containing food at a supermarket is sealed with solder that is 97 % lead. Patterson states that whether the cans are varnished or not, the lead content of foods in lead-soldered cans is consistently much higher than the lead content of the same foods in fresh or frozen forms.

Exposure to cigarette smoke can significantly increase our daily intake of lead as well as tobacco fertilizer.

Lead is not only absorbed through our air, food, and water, it is also absorbed through our skin. Lead can be absorbed from many other sources. Lead and cadmium are leached, especially with acidic foods such as tomatoes and fruit, from improperly glazed ceramic food containers, dinnerware, and utensils. Consumption of alcohol allows high levels of lead and other toxic heavy metals and chemicals to settle in soft tissues, including the brain. Fruits and vegetables grown in roadside gardens are likely to contain higher levels of lead than those grown further from roads and highways.


Although the risk of lead toxicity poses a serious threat to all citizens, rich or poor, urban or rural, the good news is that fortunately there are several natural remedies that have been documented as protecting against the toxic affects of lead. Foods and their nutrients protect against radiated and chemical toxins in a variety of ways. Many of the same nutrients counteract the effects of lead, also through several different mechanisms. Some prevent or at least decrease the absorption of lead; others remove lead from body tissues, and some block lead from interfering with metabolic functions.

Lead competes with and replaces certain minerals, primarily zinc, iron, and copper, when there is a deficiency of those vital nutrients. (This tendency for the body to absorb similarly structured elements is referred to as “selective uptake.”

Through the principle of selective uptake, optimal amounts of zinc, iron, and copper, protect against the absorption of lead and remove it from the body. Two other minerals calcium and chromium help to protect against lead toxicity. Calcium has both a preventive and curative effect, and it helps to eliminate the pain sometimes associated with lead toxicity. Optimal levels of calcium prevent the absorption of lead from the intestinal tract. Deficiencies of calcium result in higher levels of lead in the blood, bone, and soft tissues. In acute cases of lead poisoning, calcium and vitamin D administered together either orally or intravenously have effectively hastened recovery.

Vitamin A helps to activate enzymes that are involved in neutralizing lead and other toxins.

The B vitamins, taken together as whole B-complex, protect against the toxic effects of lead. Several health therapists have used additional mega doses of vitamin B1 (thiamine) along with a high B-complex, to counteract lead. Dr. G. R. Bratton of the University of Tennessee reported that thiamine removed lead from body tissues and also reduced the symptoms of lead toxicity. Daily dosages of addition B1 have ranged from 25 mg. To 100 mg. Together with high-potency whole B complex.

Vitamin C is a powerful anti-toxin. It neutralizes the toxic effects of lead, increases the elimination of lead in general, and specifically protects muscle tissue from lead damage. In order to protect against lead toxicity, the recommended adult dosage range of vitamin C is 1,000 to 3,000 mg per day. For acute lead poisoning, up to 10,000 mg. Per day of vitamin C can be used.

The herb, Siberian Ginseng (Eleutherococcus Senticosus), also counteracts the side effects of lead, especially damage to conditioned nerve and muscular reflexes.


A diet that contains appropriate amounts of fiber has been shown to protect against the toxic effects of lead. Algin, or sodium alginate, is a form of fiber found abundantly in the family of sea vegetables known as kelp. Algin is a natural chelating agent, one that can attach to the lead in the intestinal tract and carry it harmlessly out of the body. Algin decreases lead absorption as it increases lead elimination from the body.

Pectin, another form of fiber, performs the same functions. It is found in sunflower seeds and just beneath the skin of apples. Pectin can be obtained in the form of a food supplement at natural foods stores, or as a jelling agent for jams, jellies, and preserve from some supermarkets.

Preliminary evidence indicates that a number of other foods and specific nutrients help protect against lead. Legumes and beans, when used generously in the diet, are considered to help eliminate lead from the body. Bee pollen, one of the most nutrient-rich foods, helps protect against and detoxify from lead poisoning.

Lecithin is another important detoxifier of poisons in the body. It also protects and repairs the myelin sheaths of nerve fibers from damage due to lead and other toxic chemicals and heavy metals. The sulfur-containing amino acids cystein and methioine, found in the cabbage family of vegetables, aid detoxification, as do other chlorophyll-rich vegetables.

In her book, Food & Behavior, Barbara Reed Stitt, a Chief Probation Officer in the Municipal Courts of Ohio, relates how food has a direct effect on behavior. She says, “Ask any hyperactive child, depressed, angry teenager, violent adult or criminal what they eat and you’ll find they “live” on junk food – sweetened boxed cereals, candy, carbonated drinks, potato chips, fast foods. Junk food abuses the mind, under-nourishes the body and distorts the behavior.” She goes on to say, “that these toxins (lead and cadmium in the blood) could cause emotional and behavioral disorders.” Her informative book with simple changes in the diet has helped thousands and is worth reading. Her studies relating diet to criminal behavior is an eye-opener for everyone.


In 1972, Dr. Oliver J. David, a child psychiatrist, and his associates at the State University of New York Medical School reported in Lancet, the prestigious British Medical Journal, that there is a definite link between lead absorption and hyperactive behavior in children. Four years later David and his associates showed that lead-chelating agents successfully treated hyperactive children with learning-disabilities whose blood and urine lead levels were in a “nontoxic” range. Those levels were, however, in the upper ranges of “normal”. The children studied had no brain damage or other apparent cause of their hyperactivity and learning disabilities except for lead.


We know now that there is a fun way for children (and adults too) to GET THE LEAD OUT! That is by taking a specific kind of clay bath. Lab tests and hair analysis reveal that clients taking tests before and after the clay baths show wonderful results in “pulling like a magnet” various metals such as arsenic, aluminum, mercury, cadmium, lead, and chemicals including pesticides and insecticides, from the body right through the skin and into the clays! By using specific clay formulas these toxins can be loosened and the results can be seen in the tub!
What an easy, non-evasive and inexpensive way to GET THE LEAD OUT!

Suggested Clay Bat Kits

Lead & Copper Detox Environmental Detox

Sources of Information:

Surviving the Toxic Crisis by Dr. William R. Kellas and Dr. Andrea Sharon Dworkin. Fighting Radiation with Foods, Herbs, & Vitamins by Steven R. Schechter, N.D. Food & Behavior, A Natural Connection by Barbara Reed Stitt.

via Lauana Lei’s Magnetic Clay Baths.

Read Full Post »

Original here: Poisoned cells make Viruses.

Visit the site: Here

Click for PDF PDF

Another amazing article!
Written by Janine Roberts
from the final chapter of Fear of the invisible..

The Nature of Viruses

There are some basic facts about viruses all biologists agree on.

Viruses have no metabolism so they cannot produce energy or eat. They have no nervous system, no sensory system, no intelligence that can facilitate any kind of invasion or hi-jacking of a cell a billion times larger.

But, the conventional theory of viral hijacking is that, after the short genetic code of a virus has been absorbed by a cell, the ‘viral genes’ absorbed start to ‘direct the production of proteins by the host cellular machinery.’ It is assumed they are able to force the host cell to do this, It is said they force the cell to assemble proteins into a shell or ‘capsid,’ to insert into this a clone of the original viral genetic code and then to launch it out of the cell by using the same machinery that the cell uses to harmlessly produce its own exosomes and other extra-cellular particles or vesicles.

But I had to ask, would cells give such minute and ‘dead’ messenger vesicle the extraordinary ability to pirate vastly larger and intelligent cells – including cells of the same organism?  This is the quandary we are left with if we agree that viruses are not alive and thus incapable of having a survival instinct.

But what if cells create viruses as weapons – against other cells?  If they do, then this would be remarkably suicidal as viruses usually pass from cell to cell within the same organism.

Such thoughts have left me deeply puzzled about the many pathogenic viruses reported to exist. I have severe doubts about some of these, particularly the poliovirus and HIV. I would have to look again at the evidence on other viruses.


Viruses are commonly blamed for illnesses that seem easily passed from one person to another. Bacteria may cause many of these  – but viruses are often blamed.  Our only medical weapons against them are said to be vaccination and powerful chemotherapy-type antiviral medicines designed to stop the cell from making viruses, rather than to attack the virus itself, for apparently it has proved too elusive a target.

But, why do cells make pathogenic viruses? Surely the reason for this has been established in numerous laboratory experiments? It is a doctrine in virology that cells make malignant viruses only after a disease virus arrives and infects them.

I had long presumed this must be so, but when I tried to analyse it, I had problems.  I found myself asking, since a virus cannot make a virus, surely the first viruses to cause an illness must have been made by an uninfected cell?

I had earlier learnt how viruses did their damage. I had been told that they burst forth from infected cells, ‘exploding’ them. I was now surprised to discover that this is not so; that viruses are far too small, at one-billionth of the mass of a cell, to have this effect.

Current courses on Medical Microbiology now teach, as mentioned briefly above,  that viruses kill or damage cells indirectly, by triggering cellular processes that do this damage. Professor Tritz blames allergic reactions.  ‘With animal viruses, cell lyses [death] is usually the result of one of four types of allergic reactions’ and  ‘allergy to viruses usually results in a very localized anaphylactic reaction.’ Alternatively, he suggests that the immune system sees the virus-producing cell as foreign and kills it.

He also suggests that some illnesses are due to ‘toxic substances’ produced by cells because they are infected. ‘Virus-infected cells, at times, will produce compounds coded for by the host DNA, but which are not normally produced by the host. These are often cytotoxic at relatively high concentrations.’  Finally, some viruses might cause ‘structural alterations in the host cell’, affecting the chromosomes, moving the nucleus or creating bubble-like spaces, but so far I have been unable to locate experiments that prove viruses operating in isolation can cause such effects.

Another university course teaches, ‘virus infected cells may be recognized by the immune system, which leads to the destruction of the virus infected cells.’

From what they say, cell deaths are not directly due to viral infection. This perhaps makes sense. The virus is so minute compared to the cell – and our protective systems will destroy a very sick cell that does not self-destruct. Our cells often seem altruistically to decide to die when not needed, poisoned or otherwise diseased.

But on reflection, how can we prove cell’s illness is caused by the small viral genetic code it’s absorbed?  How can we be sure that a damaged cell is so solely because it is infected?  It may be naturally dying or poisoned.  It may even produce viral-like particles for waste disposal, or to attempt a cure or help protect other cells.

Also, if cell deaths in viral illnesses are mostly caused by our immune system, why do we have such deaths when the immune system is down, as surely it often is in such circumstances?

But nevertheless, viruses are encoded information, and since cells can make errors, I must conclude that they may sometimes wrongly encode the viruses they send out.  These in theory could misinform other cells, perhaps sometimes encouraging them to take courses of action that they would not take otherwise.  But as to how often the codes thus transported could lead to such effects, I had no idea.

I went to consult a standard textbook, ‘Introduction to Modern Virology’ by N. Dimmock and S. Primrose, published by Blackwell Scientific Publications.

On page 230 I found it surprisingly reported that, although people have presumed that flu is spread by coughing, ‘transmission experiments from people infected with a rhinovirus to susceptibles sitting opposite at a table proved singularly unsuccessful. Equally unsuccessful was the transmission of influenza from a naturally infected husband/wife to his/her spouse.’

Also on the same page it reported:  ‘it has been shown that recently bereaved people are susceptible to infectious diseases. Thus one’s resistance is influenced by one’s state of mind.’ It then went on to discuss winter life styles; such as living crowded in unventilated and over-heated rooms, all things it says might make us produce the symptoms of illness – and all things that make cells ill without any need of help from viruses.
It then concluded on page 212: ‘Evidently viruses do not kill cells by any one simple process and we are far from understanding the complex mechanisms involved …[it] seem more akin to death by slow starvation than acute poisoning. Lastly it is by no means clear what advantage accrues to the virus in killing its host cell. This situation may represent a poorly evolved virus-cell relationship or virus in the ‘wrong’ host cell.’

It thus seems that cells may be sick, poisoned, stressed or malnourished in some way before they show the symptoms of ‘viral infection.’ There is a considerable body of research that indicates cellular illness or malnourishment often precedes the production of viruses, rather than the converse. For example:  it is reported that deficiency in selenium, a metal our cells use as an antioxidant, can precede the symptoms of colds, flu and even AIDS. (There is also a strong co-relation between selenium levels in soils in African countries and the prevalence of AIDS symptoms. )

Dr Melinda Beck reported that selenium-deficient mouse cells show symptoms of illness and emit viruses.  She and her co-authors deduced from this that a lack of selenium made viruses dangerous – and consequently that these viruses made the cells ill. But was this deduction soundly based?   Selenium is a component of glutathione peroxidase (GPX), an enzyme that protects cells from oxidative stress. Selenium-deficiency thus makes cells ill with oxidative stress without any need for a viral illness.  They consequently could produce viral-like particles as waste or for repair purposes.

Another research paper reported that, when cells are suffering from ‘oxidative DNA damage’ (such as from chemotherapy), then they are more likely to get hepatitis due to HCV viral infections. Again, what comes first?  The authors presume the virus must cause the illness – but surely the illness started with the earlier oxidative stress.

The first observation of retroviruses is credited to Peyton Rous. ‘It is generally accepted that Peyton Rous discovered retroviruses in 1911 when he induced malignancy in chickens by injections of cell-free filtrates obtained from a muscle tumour.’ But, when I went back to his records, I found that he also suggested that the cause of his chickens’ illness might be a chemical toxin in his filtrate! If retroviruses were indeed also present, might they have appeared as a defence against this toxin?

In earlier chapters we found that toxins, rather than viruses, are likely to be the primary causes of polio and AIDS – but what then about measles, mumps, flu and colds?

I had long presumed the evidence for these illnesses being due solely to viral infection must be overwhelming – but I have found to my surprise that scientists have long known that the guaranteed way to make cells produce viruses in the laboratory, including flu and measles virus, is not primarily by getting them infected, but by exposing them to stress and toxins!

In 1928 the President of the Royal Society of Medicine’s Pathology Section, A. E. Boycott, in a report on the ‘nature of filterable viruses,’ stated that with toxins ‘we can with a considerable degree of certainty stimulate normal tissues to produce viruses.’

Then in 1963 the famous Sloan-Kettering Institute for Cancer Research reported that viruses multiplied after cells were exposed to ‘x-ray, ultraviolet light or certain mutagenic chemicals’ and that this exposure seemed to ‘alter the benign relationship’ that otherwise existed between cells and bacteria.

Then in the 1980s Robert Gallo reported that, when he added certain chemicals to cell cultures, these cells produced retroviruses. Gallo thus named these chemicals his viral ‘growth factor’ – and Montagnier at the Institut Pasteur used the same. If retroviruses were indeed thus produced, then surely this can be explained as a cellular response to stress from toxins?

In 2007 Dr Dominic Dwyer, a Senior Medical Virologist, formerly of the Institut Pasteur in Paris, testified that to persuade blood cells to produced HIV retroviruses, ‘we stimulate them with compounds such as PHA.’ He added; if we want to persuade cells to produce the flu virus ‘we use other things like tryspin.’ – thus that they expose cells to different chemicals to make them produce different viruses!  (Tryspin is destructive to proteins, and Phytohemagglutinin (PHA) is mitogenic. ) This surely suggests that virus production can be a cell’s response to being stressed and poisoned  – and that there might thus be no need for it to be infected beforehand?

Dr David Gordon, the Chair of the Clinical Drug Trials Committee at Finders University in Australia, testified, at the 2007 Parenzee trial in Australia, that there is no need to ‘purify a virus in order to identify it’.  He repeated emphatically: ‘No need to purify’ then rhetorically questioned: ‘Has any virus ever been purified?’  He explained: ‘The issues are exactly the same with any virus.’ He doubted if any virus was ever isolated from sick cells.  It seemed that a cellular illness was all the proof he needed to conclude that unseen viruses were present – no matter how artificial the laboratory circumstances or what chemicals were added.

So – viruses may not be the primary causes of illnesses – they might instead be caused by a cell being poisoned. Why  do our cells make them?  Could they be possibly a protective reacition ?

more on this in the book

Medical Microbiology Fall 2000.  Tritz  Professor/Chairman Department Microbiology & Immunology http://www.kcom.edu/faculty/chamberlain/Website/Lects/MECHANIS.HTM


Burcher, Sam.  Selenium conquers AIDS? Institute of Science in Society. http://www.i-sis.org.uk/AidsandSelenium.php

Melinda A. Beck Antioxidants and Viral Infections: Host Immune Response and Viral Pathogenicity. Departments of Pediatrics and Nutrition, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina. April 27 2000 or 1999 issue of the FASEB Journal, a scientific journal published by the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology.

Fabio Farinati et al. Oxidative DNA damage in circulating leukocytes occurse as an early event in chronic HCV infection.  Free Radical Biology and Medicine, December 1999. Pages 1284-1291.

J. Exp. Med. vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 397-411 (April, 1911).


Boycott AE. The transition form life to death; the nature of filterable viruses. Proc. Royal Soc. Med. 1928;22:55-69.

Sloane-Kettering Institute for Cancer Research, Progress Report XV, Viruses and Cancer. January 1963

Nucleic Acids Res. 1977 August; 4(8): 2713-2723.

Nucleic Acids Res. 1977 August; 4(8): 2713-2723.

Read Full Post »

Original article here : Fear of The Invisible

Please visit the site, to discover more amazing information.

Click to get PDF –> PDF

The following is an extract from
Chapter 20 of the book: Fear of The Invisible

Written by Janine Roberts

The nature of Viruses

The more I have learnt about the cells that make us, and all the life on our planet, the more I have been amazed by the skills they display. It has transformed my understanding of biology and entranced me. I now cannot learn enough about cells and their creations.

The works of some great woman of biology have inspired me, particularly Barbara McClintock.  She was one of the first to describe the intelligence of the cell, a concept she developed after studying plant cells!  Her view was at first highly disputed among scientists.  But, after being practically ignored and belittled most of her life, she was in her old age awarded a Nobel Prize in 1983 for discovering the transposon – from which the retrovirus may have evolved.  It was her work that made me ask: if she is right in saying cells make carefully considered responses to their environment, then what are cells doing when they make the viruses that we link to diseases?

In her Nobel Lecture of 8th December 1983 she boldly spoke of cells as intelligent, as sophisticated in their responses to the environment and as making ‘wise decisions.’ She explained ‘a genome may reorganize itself when faced with a difficulty for which it is unprepared.’ She gave an example: ‘cells are able to sense the presence in their nuclei of ruptured ends of chromosomes, and then activate a mechanism that will bring together and then unite these ends, one with another, a particularly revealing example of the sensitivity of cells to all that is going on within them. They make wise decisions and act upon them.’

McClintock continued: ‘Cells must be prepared to respond to many sources of stress. Mishaps that affect the operation of a cell must be occurring continuously. Sensing these and instigating repair systems are essential. … It is becoming increasingly apparent that we know little of the potentials of a genome. Nevertheless, much evidence tells us that it must be vast.’

She predicted: ‘In the future attention undoubtedly will be centred on the genome, and with greater appreciation of its significance as a highly sensitive organ of the cell, monitoring genomic activities and correcting common errors, sensing the unusual and unexpected events, and responding to them, often by restructuring the genome. We know about the components of genomes … [but] we know nothing, about how the cell senses danger and instigates responses to it that often are truly remarkable.’

This was far from the mechanistic view found in many virological studies in which the cell is described as the passive invaded victim of the cunning hijacking germ.  It made me think – might the production of viruses sometimes not be due to ‘infections?’ Could virus production be sometimes a natural part of a cell’s ‘wise’ response to the environment?

……. and I went on to say….

‘Cross-species’ help between cells is vital and common. In 2007 the cells of invertebrates were found to accept genes from bacterial cells when repairing ‘damaged genes.’ Dr. Werren and colleagues reported in Science there was ‘widespread transfer of bacterial genes into the genome of numerous invertebrates.’   As most cells within us are bacterial, this points to considerable cooperation happening within us.  No talk here of a race between selfish cells or germs as fiercely independent individuals – or of a need to kill this bacteria. Rather the more female vision of cellular survival, evolution and growth, through compromise, symbiosis and cooperation.

Another biologist who inspired me is Dr Mae-Wan Ho, the founder of the Institute of Science in Society (ISIS), at the UK’s Open University. She took the ideas of Barbara McClintock and ran with them. What emerges from her work is a picture of cells as centres of dynamic fields of energy, as fluid crystals, electric, magnetic, coherent and quantum. In one of her papers she shares the vision that drives her.  ‘I see all nature developing and evolving, with every organism participating, constantly creating and recreating itself anew.’  From her I learnt that cells have many ways of communicating, that little is static in nature and that life itself is woven into the fabric of the universe.

Then there is the work of a man – of Professor James A. Shapiro, who teaches in the States but was formerly at the Institut Pasteur. His work reveals our cells use massive amounts of information with seemingly great computational skills, having in their DNA a massive ‘read-write’ memory. His ideas helped me to better understand the role ‘viruses’ might play in the cellular world. To continue his metaphor, I now see viruses, exosomes, retroviruses, functioning as the natural flash memory sticks used by cells to share encoded information with each other.

Shapiro wrote: ‘The expectation of its pioneers was that molecular biology would confirm the reductionist, mechanical view of life. However, the actual studies of heredity, cell biology and multicellular development has been to reveal a realm of sensitivity, communication, computation and indescribable complexity.’ He also said: ‘The conceptual changes in biology (since the work of McClintock was recognized) are comparable in magnitude to the transition from classical physics to relativistic and quantum physics.’

An editorial in the Journal of Cell Science similarly said of cells: ‘their behaviour such as solid-state channelling of substrates, error-checking, proof-reading, regulation and adaptiveness … imply an ‘intelligence.’

Shapiro stated that cells are capable of ‘Boolean calculations’ during a 2007 lecture in the UK.  The intelligence we often credit solely to our brains exists at the cellular level in all parts of our bodies. He said of bacterial cells; ‘they display astonishing versatility in managing the biosphere’s geochemical and thermodynamic transformations: processes more complex than the largest human-engineered systems. This mastery over the biosphere indicates that we have a great deal to learn about chemistry, physics and evolution from our small, but very intelligent, prokaryotic relatives.’ He added: ‘there can be no doubt that bacteria received evolutionary benefits by having mobile DNA in their genomes and systems for transferring DNA from cell to cell.’

Cells carry out this transfer by making the particles that we have called viruses. By using a base of four (the four nucleotides) to encode information into the RNA and DNA of viruses, rather than the base of two used by computers, our cells have achieved the ability to process and pack an incredible amount of information into extremely small spaces – making it possible ‘viruses’ that can economically transport much information between cells. It has been pointed out that: ‘the bases are spaced every 0.35 nm [billionths of a metre] along the DNA molecule, giving DNA a data density of over one-half million gigabits per square centimetre.’   However, the transported information is not just stored in the genetic acid. It is also encoded into proteins of viruses, as we will see.

Cells do not only communicate by means of exosomes or viruses; they also do so by movement, electric currents, chemical emissions (smells), photons and magnetic fields. They can send light signals to each other to make near instantaneous communications. The water within the cell is also used. Rich in salts, it preserves information, and, as it flows within the cell, it generates the electric current needed for the signals sent through the nerves.Protein molecules take on specialised functions through the information that cells encode into their folds.  For example, cells can produce the specialist p53 protein when exposed to radiation or to other causes of DNA damage.  In 2007 this protein was found to vibrate when it detects DNA damage. Other molecules apparently vibrate to help regulate genes, almost as if they are talking. P53 molecules play an important role in regulating the production of exosomes and retroviruses – and thus also help to move information between cells.

I mentioned how McClintock discovered that ‘cells are able to sense the presence in their nuclei of ruptured ends of chromosomes’ and repair these.  Is this why some retroviruses reportedly have powerful anti-tumor effects, as mentioned in the last chapter? Likewise it is reported of the particles called  ‘retroelements’ (including the retrotransposon) that: ‘Unusually high activity or unexpected appearance of retroelements within cells is often found in connection with stress events.’  It seems these particles are also produced when the cellular DNA is inadequately ‘methylated’ and thus not properly protected from toxins.

Professor James A. Shapiro noted; ‘molecular analysis has confirmed the generality of Barbara McClintock‘s revolutionary discoveries of internal systems for genome repair and genome restructurin.’8 I would add that such repair systems do not stop at the borders of a cell in multicellular organisms – they extend to the whole of the organism.  Cells produce clouds of ‘hundreds of’ defensive vesicles whenever they are challenged, ‘in response to danger signals.’  It is further reported that these viruses or particles help activate our T-cells by merging with them – and this of course could be easily mistaken for HIV infection.

We need an information genetic highway that weaves our cells together, and we have it – the world of retroviruses, viruses, exosomes, microvesicles, mRNA, microRNAs – all carrying information encoded by our cells.

But – I must not leave out the bacteria. These are cells, thus entirely unlike viruses. The use of the term ‘germ’ for both has confused things. A bacterium is a cell with a more independent style of life that nevertheless lives communally with and communicates with other bacteria. It can make toxins to kill pathogens, change its DNA, and make viruses that travel to other bacteria. It can use the enzyme RT to change the proteins making up its ‘skin’ to make it harder for it to be recognised by enemies. It can take on specialisations to serve the collective good of its colony. Shapiro has produced excellent pictures of beautifully constructed bacterial colonies.

There are extremely small bacteria called ‘mycoplasmas,’ that are true parasites capable of living inside cells without harming them. Like jellyfish each is covered in a thin pliable membrane. Thus they can change shapes dramatically and be hard to recognize in the microscope. They are our smallest life form but still have a genome over 50 times bigger than the typical virus at half a million to 1.2 million base pairs. They are nevertheless so small that they have contaminated many a scientific experiment and been mistaken for viruses, although unlike viruses they are truly alive and can reproduce. Montagnier in 1990 suggested that they might be a co-factor in causing AIDS since he found them in one third of blood samples from AIDS patients. A sneeze can spread them and they are suspected to cause a mild pneumonia.

Surprisingly it is said that there are in us some ten times more bacterial cells than there are of ‘human cells’. Thus there must be a great deal of inter-species communication if we are to smoothly function.

Bacteria sometimes take on the role of scavengers. They may multiply within us when cells die during a severe illness. As soon as they have completed this scavenging work, the bacterial numbers will naturally decline.

However, when human cells are severely diseased, bacterial cells may multiply out of control and produce toxic by-products, as in severe TB.  Bacteria are intelligent cells that might well prefer to cooperate, but it seems they can put their own survival first when necessary. They also will bond with other bacterial cells to form self-protective ‘biofilms’ that are often hazardous to us. The NIH states that ‘80% of chronic infections are biofilm related’ (and thus not viral).

Boston Review: Is Darwin in the Details? A Debate http://www.bostonreview.net/br22.1/shapiro.html

G. Borisy; ‘Beyond cell toons.’ Editorial. Journal of Cell Science, Vol. 113, Issue 5.

J. A. Shapiro; Stud. Hist. Phil. Biol. & Biomed. Sci. 38 (2007) 807-819


Tiana G et al. ‘Oscillations and temporal signalling in cells’ Phys Biol 4 (2007) R1-R17

The Regulation of Exosome Secretion: a Novel Function of the p53 Protein

Xin Yu1, Sandra L. Harris1 and Arnold J. Levine Cancer Research 66, 4795-4801, May 1, 2006.

Hansen and Heslop-Harrison. 2004. Adv.Bot.Res. 41: 165-193. Page 14 of 34.

(Dahal et al., 2000; Lockhart et al., 2000; Mhiri et al., 1997

Carolina Obregon et al. Exovesicles from Human Activated Dendritic Cells Fuse with Resting Dendritic Cells, Allowing Them to Present Alloantigens 2006 American Society for Investigative Pathology DOI: 10.2353/ajpath.2006.060453

Mycoplasmas: Sophisticated, Reemerging, and Burdened by Their Notoriety by Joel Baseman and Joseph Tully http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol3no1/baseman.htm

Monroe D (2007) Looking for Chinks in the Armor of Bacterial Biofilms. PLoS Biol 5(11): e307 doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0050307  Published: November 13, 2007

Medical Microbiology Fall 2000.  Tritz  Professor/Chairman Department Microbiology & Immunology http://www.kcom.edu/faculty/chamberlain/Website/Lects/MECHANIS.HTM


Burcher, Sam.  Selenium conquers AIDS<!–[if supportFields]> XE “AIDS: Autoimmune Deficiency Syndrome” <![endif]–><!–[if supportFields]> <![endif]–>? Institute of Science in Society. http://www.i-sis.org.uk/AidsandSelenium.php

Melinda A. Beck Antioxidants and Viral Infections: Host Immune Response and Viral Pathogenicity. Departments of Pediatrics and Nutrition, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina. April 27 2000 or 1999 issue of the FASEB Journal, a scientific journal published by the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology.

Fabio Farinati et al. Oxidative DNA damage in circulating leukocytes occurse as an early event in chronic HCV infection.  Free Radical Biology and Medicine, December 1999. Pages 1284-1291.

J. Exp. Med. vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 397-411 (April, 1911).


Boycott AE. The transition form life to death; the nature of filterable viruses. Proc. Royal Soc. Med. 1928;22:55-69.

Sloane-Kettering Institute for Cancer Research, Progress Report XV, Viruses and Cancer. January 1963

Nucleic Acids Res. 1977 August; 4(8): 2713-2723.

Nucleic Acids Res. 1977 August; 4(8): 2713-2723.

Lynn Margulus in 2007 stated she did not agree with the theory that HIV<!–[if supportFields]> XE “HIV” <![endif]–><!–[if supportFields]> <![endif]–> caused AIDS<!–[if supportFields]> XE “AIDS: Autoimmune Deficiency Syndrome” <![endif]–><!–[if supportFields]> <![endif]–>. March 12, 2007 10:21AM http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula

Boston<!–[if supportFields]> XE “Polio: in Boston” <![endif]–><!–[if supportFields]><![endif]–> Review: Is Darwin<!–[if supportFields]> XE “Darwin, Charles” <![endif]–><!–[if supportFields]><![endif]–> in the Details? A Debate http://www.bostonreview.net/br22.1/shapiro.html

G. Borisy; ‘Beyond cell toons.’ Editorial. Journal of Cell Science, Vol. 113, Issue 5.

J. A. Shapiro<!–[if supportFields]> XE “Shapiro, James” <![endif]–><!–[if supportFields]><![endif]–>; Stud. Hist. Phil. Biol. & Biomed. Sci. 38 (2007) 807–819

Read Full Post »

From: Fever And Its Necessity To Good Health.

Treating fever safely is important to good health!

When my oldest son was 4 weeks old we rushed him to the hospital with a fever that I thought was not good. I wish I had known then what I know now and I would not have been so hasty to rush him to the hospital. He ended up in the hospital for weeks and no answers were ever forthcoming as to why? The week after leaving the hospital the reason became apparent and would have been a lot sooner had we not kept him hospitalized and his fevers down. That was the beginning of my learning about fevers and why not to lower them in my children or myself.

Fever is a necessity to the immune systems cleaning department. Without it serious illness can occur. The physicians are geared to relieving a parent’s anxiety and therefore force the fevers down interrupting the immune systems work and setting the body up for illness either then or later.

I have always been a very inquisitive person in that I could not do a job of any kind unless I knew as much about it as I could. Being a medical office nurse was the same and gave me an education that was interesting and exciting as I watched, did my own studies and paid attention to every single doctor and how they thought, taught and practiced medicine. To the point that several doctors have told me I was much better at diagnosing than they were and they would ask my opinion on some things. I was given the honor of handling patient calls and triaging for the doctors in every office I worked in over that 20-year period. I was sometimes sent to a patients’ home to evaluate and advise, which has always made me feel so honored to have their trust.

No, this is not to brag but to let you know I am not talking through my head or that I haven’t been there and know whereof I speak. About five years into my medical office nursing career I soon learned that there were home remedies that worked much better than the prescription meds and I would inform the open minded patients that wanted to know. I also informed the patient that it was not the doctors’ recommendation but mine and if the doctor knew I would probably be fired. To this day I still follow, read and watch, with dread, what has happened to medicine since I started 33 years ago.

A leading cause of fevers in children today comes after immunizations! A problem already exist with too many vaccines being pushed into our children upsetting their immune system and now another one is looming on the horizon and I am fearful of the outcome. The vaccine for Chicken Pox is touted as a means of saving our children. First off there have been no known deaths directly from Chicken Pox but some from the so-called cure given to them by the medical profession! Antibiotics and anti-inflammatories. This is found in the CDC’s own records http://www.cdc.gov / – May 15, 1998/Vol. 47/No. 18 issue of Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR, their official publication). It was entitled, “Varicella-Related Deaths Among Children.

I remember the dozens of calls I use to get from mothers panicked because their child had a fever as soon as the fever came on they were on the phone scared to death. I was sometimes able to tell them that the fever was good and unless it went above 103 or 104 not to do anything, some listened and some didn’t.

I worked for a few smart pediatricians in which three of them knew that fever was good. But the sad part is that 4 of the 7 pediatricians did not think that way and their pediatric patients would end up more sick or at least the problem would last longer than the other three’s patients. So I had to walk a tight rope with each doctors’ parent calls and guide them accordingly and not what I felt was always in the patients best interest, but I could only do what I was told by each individual doctor until I found a way of helping both.

In only a very rare time, when left alone, that a fever will exceed 106 degrees, unless it is a life threatening bacterial germ or virus, which is extremely rare and I only saw maybe one or two a year in the hundreds of children that were treated by the pediatricians. The Meningitis scare is the most often reason for a doctor to recommend lowering a temperature yet with the thousands of children I saw over the years in the Pediatric Medical Group only 1 meningitis patient was diagnosed and treated.

And only about 4 percent of children experience fever-related convulsions, with no serious after effects.

A fast (on distilled water, or at least diluted vegetable juices with a few drops of liquid balanced minerals) should be continued for twenty-four hours after the temperature has returned to normal.

A good rule to remember; the bowel can be cleared of toxins by enemas in twenty-four hours or less; via the blood in three days; the liver in five days, providing no food is eaten. Shingles (“adult chicken pox”) that occurs in adults may require about a week-long juice fast to completely clear up.

The liver, the major organ fighter of the immune system, is much too busy with eliminating the problem that it perceives to be happening to be bothered with the task of food digestion. Great strain can be taken off that organ if no solid food is given. Not only does fasting lower temperature, relieve the distress and facilitate elimination, but it also lessens the strain on the liver and prevents serious complications, such as middle-ear disease, mastoiditis and meningitis.

It appears then, that fever, dreaded because misunderstood, is really nature’s attempt to help. It is discomforting, but only very rarely does harm; never is attended with serious aftereffects and almost NEVER BE SUPPRESSED with anti-inflammatory drugs or fed with food. I have seen many a case of flu pushed into a pneumonia because some anxious mother or grandmother insisted feeding “to give the child strength”, such as chicken broth or a thin starchy gruel, both liquids, of course, but protein and starch-just what the liver cannot handle at this point.  Yes I am aware that chicken soup is good for illnesses. (Those studies were backed by the chicken industry so what else could they say?) All the while the child or adult doesn’t feel hungry and not want to eat – that is the body saying to them STOP LOOK AND LISTEN to me!

So called “infectious” diseases like chicken pox, measles, or whooping cough are actually inflammatory diseases.  Not bacterial or viral as we have been told by the media. The symptoms during such illnesses should be viewed as eliminative crises. Meaning it will pass with time to a healthy child/adult, with no after affects! Yes, some side effects have been reported with these diseases but if you could talk to the parent or caregiver you will find that they force fed anti-inflammatories and.or food to the patient!

Some of those illnesses may be painful, but they’re a necessary self-limiting process in which an accumulation of retained metabolic waste (dead cells that become toxic), and the residues of undigested, unassimilated foods are being purged from the body through vicarious (abnormal, inappropriate) channels such as the skin or lungs. If you read the May 15, 1998/Vol. 47/No. 18 issue of Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR, their official publication). It was entitled, “Varicella-Related Deaths Among Children: Texas and Iowa notified CDC of three fatal cases of varicella (chickenpox) that occurred in children during 1997” (reprinted in Appendix A below). A short introduction stated that in the U.S. there are approximately 100 deaths (about half of these in children) and 10,000 hospitalizations each year for complications from chicken pox from infection with the varicella virus. Then read the case histories of those deaths and find that prescription after prescription was prescribed until the patient died. Of course they do not report it that way but in reading you can discern it!

So, the familiar runny nose, cough, stiffness, fever, and numerous rashes, swellings, lesions, and eruptions through the skin are all manifestations of the same cause, which are not pathogenic microbes. Microbes like bacteria, for example, act as scavengers to consume the toxic wastes and the dead cells following inflammation. Their formation and growth do not precede the diseased state in the host, but rather emerge in its wake; and not exogenically (introduced from or produced outside the organism or system.), from say, an “infected” person, but rather endogenically (caused by factors inside the organism or system) from the genetic material contained in a cell’s nucleus after the cell’s death and decomposition. This is more prevalent in a child with Sickle Cell disease.

Fortunately, a wide range of bacterial strains, or their genetic “blueprints” inhabit our bodies all the time in titers low enough that their waste products do not affect us and when stimulated creates a fever in most.

*** Meet the author Lena Sanchez’s at
http://www.antibiotic-alternatives.com/lena.htm Get One of Lena’s books at http://www.antibiotic-alternatives.com for more secrets to a healthy life that she learned in her twenty years as a medical office nurse! Or ask her a health question

Read Full Post »

via Want to Know.

Swine Flu Vaccine

1976 CBS ’60 Minutes’


Government Propaganda in Swine Flu Scare Causes Many Deaths

Below is the full transcript of the 1979 broadcast from the CBS investigative news program 60 Minutes on government propaganda around the 1976 swine flu scare.The program was aired on Sunday, November 4, 1979. Only one person was killed by the actual flu, while hundreds filed claims of death of their loved ones from the massive vaccine campaign which was mounted. Key sections are highlighted in bold. To watch this video clip online, click here. For more reliable reasons not to trust the government when it tells you to take a vaccine, click here and here.

Swine Flu 1976

MIKE WALLACE: The flu season is upon us. Which type will we worry about this year, and what kind of shots will we be told to take? Remember the swine flu scare of 1976? That was the year the U.S. government told us all that swine flu could turn out to be a killer that could spread across the nation, and Washington decided that every man, woman and child in the nation should get a shot to prevent a nation-wide outbreak, a pandemic.

Well 46 million of us obediently took the shot, and now 4,000 Americans are claiming damages from Uncle Sam amounting to three and a half billion dollars because of what happened when they took that shot. By far the greatest number of the claims – two thirds of them are for neurological damage, or even death, allegedly triggered by the flu shot.

We pick up the story back in 1976, when the threat posed by the swine flu virus seemed very real indeed.

PRESIDENT GERALD FORD; This virus was the cause of a pandemic in 1918 and 1919 that resulted in over half a million deaths in the United States, as well as 20 million deaths around the world.

WALLACE: Thus the U.S. government’s publicity machine was cranked into action to urge all America to protect itself against the swine flu menace. (Excerpt from TV commercial urging everyone to get a swine flu shot.) One of those who did roll up her sleeve was Judy Roberts. She was perfectly healthy, an active woman, when, in November of 1976, she took her shot. Two weeks later, she says, she began to feel a numbness starting up her legs.

JUDY ROBERTS: And I joked about it at that time. I said I’ll be numb to the knees by Friday if this keeps up. By the following week, I was totally paralyzed.

WALLACE: So completely paralyzed, in fact, that they had to operate on her to enable her to breathe. And for six months, Judy Roberts was a quadriplegic. The diagnosis: A neurological disorder called “Guillain-Barre Syndrome” – GBS for short. These neurological diseases are little understood. They affect people in different ways.

As you can see in these home movies taken by a friend, Judy Roberts’ paralysis confined her mostly to a wheelchair for over a year. But this disease can even kill. Indeed, there are 300 claims now pending from the families of GBS victims who died, allegedly as a result of the swine flu shot. In other GBS victims, the crippling effects diminish and all but disappear. But for Judy Roberts, progress back to good health has been painful and partial.

Now, I notice that your smile, Judy, is a little bit constricted.

ROBERTS: Yes, it is.

WALLACE: Is it different from what it used to be?

ROBERTS: Very different, I have a – a greatly decreased mobility in my lips. And I can’t drink through a straw on the right-band side. I can’t blow out birthday candles. I don’t whistle any more, for which my husband is grateful.

WALLACE: It may be a little difficult for you to answer this question, but have you recovered as much as you are going to recover?

ROBERTS: Yes. This – this is it.

WALLACE: So you will now have a legacy of braces on your legs for the rest of your life?

ROBERTS: Yes. The weakness in my hands will stay and the leg braces will stay.

WALLACE: So Judy Roberts and her husband have filed a claim against the U.S. government. They’re asking $12 million, though they don’t expect to get nearly that much. Judy, why did you take the flu shot?

ROBERTS: I’d never taken any other flu shots, but I felt like this was going to be a major epidemic, and the only way to prevent a major epidemic of a – a really deadly variety of flu was for every body to be immunized.

WALLACE: Where did this so called “deadly variety of flu”, where did it first hit back in 1976? It began right here at Fort Dix in New Jersey in January of that year, when a number of recruits began to complain of respiratory ailments, something like the common cold. An Army doctor here sent samples of their throat cultures to the New Jersey Public Health Lab to find our just what kind of bug was going around here. One of those samples was from a Private David Lewis, who had left his sick bed to go on a forced march. Private Lewis had collapsed on that march, and his sergeant had revived him by mouth-to-mouth resuscitation. But the sergeant showed no signs of illness. A few days later, Private Lewis died.

ROBERTS: If this disease is so potentially fatal that it’s going to kill a young, healthy man, a middle-aged schoolteacher doesn’t have a prayer.

WALLACE: The New Jersey lab identified most of those solders’ throat cultures as the normal kind of flu virus going around that year, but they could not make out what kind of virus was in the culture from the dead soldier, and from four others who were sick. So they sent those cultures to the Federal Center for Disease Control in Atlanta, Georgia, for further study. A few days later they got the verdict: swine flu. But that much-publicized outbreak of swine flu at Fort Dix involved only Private Lewis, who died, and those four other soldiers, who recovered completely without the swine flu shot.

ROBERTS: If I had known at that time that the boy had been in a sick bed, got up, went out on a forced march and then collapsed and died, I would never have taken the shot.

DR DAVID SENCER: The rationale for our recommendation was not on the basis of the death of a – a single individual, but it was on the basis that when we do see a change in the characteristics of the influenza virus, it is a massive public-health problem in the country.

WALLACE: Dr David Sencer, then head of the CDS – the Center of Disease Control in Atlanta – is now in private industry. He devised the swine flu program and he pushed it.

WALLACE: You began to give flu shots to the American people in October of ’76?

DR SENCER: October 1st.

WALLACE: By that time, how many cases of swine flu around the world had been reported?

DR SENCER: There had been several reported, but none confirmed. There had been cases in Australia that were reported by the press, by the news media. There were cases in –

WALLACE: None confirmed? Did you ever uncover any other outbreaks of swine flu anywhere in the world?


WALLACE: Now, nearly everyone was to receive a shot in a public health facility where a doctor might not be present, therefore it was up to the CDC to come up with some kind of official consent form giving the public all the information it needed about the swine flu shot. This form stated that the swine flu vaccine had been tested. What it didn’t say was that after those tests were completed, the scientists developed another vaccine and that it was the one given to most of the 46 million who took the shot. That vaccine was called “X-53a”. Was X-53a ever field tested?

DR SENCER: I-I can’t say. I would have to –

WALLACE: It wasn’t

DR SENCER: I don’t know

WALLACE: Well, I would think that you’re in charge of the program

DR SENCER: 1 would have to check the records. I haven’t looked at this in some time.

WALLACE: The information form the consent form was also supposed to warn people about any risk of serious complications following the shot. But did it?

ROBERTS: No, I had never heard of any reactions other than a sore arm, fever, this sort of thing.

WALLACE: Judy Roberts’ husband, Gene, also took the shot.

GENE ROBERTS: Yes, I looked at that document, I signed it. Nothing on there said I was going to have a heart attack, or I can get Guillain Barre, which I’d never heard of.

WALLACE: What if people from the government, from the Center for Disease Control, what if they had indeed, known about it, what would be your feeling?

JUDY ROBERTS: They should have told us.

WALLACE: Did anyone ever come to you and say, “You know something, fellows, there’s the possibility of neurological damage if you get into a mass immunization program?”


WALLACE: No one ever did?


WALLACE: Do you know Michael Hattwick?

DR SENCER: Yes, uh-hmm.

WALLACE: Dr Michael Hattwick directed the surveillance team for the swine flu program at the CDC. His job was to find out what possible complications could arise from taking the shot and to report his findings to those in charge. Did you know ahead of time, Dr Hattwick that there had been case reports of neurological disorders, neurological illness, apparently associated with the injection of influenza vaccine?


WALLACE: You did?


WALLACE: How did you know that?

DR Hattwick: By review of the literature.

WALLACE: So you told your superiors – the men in charge of the swine flu immunization program – about the possibility of neurological disorders?

DR RATTWICK: Absolutely

WALLACE: What would you say if I told you that your superiors say that you never told them about the possibility of neurological complications?

DR HAJTWICK: That’s nonsense. I can’t believe that they would say that they did not know that there were neurological illnesses associated with influenza vaccination. That simply is not true. We did know that.

DR SENCER: I have said that Dr Hattwick had never told me of his feelings on this subject.

WALLACE: Then he’s lying?

DR SENCER: I guess you would have to make that assumption.

WALLACE: Then why does this report from your own agency, dated July 1976, list neurological complications as a possibility?

DR SENCER: I think the consensus of the scientific community was that the evidence relating neurologic disorders to influenza immunization was such that they did not feel that this association was a real one.

WALLACE: You didn’t feel it was necessary to tell the American people that information

DR SENCER: I think that over the – the years we have tried to inform the American people as – as fully as possible.

WALLACE: As part of informing Americans about the swine flu threat, Dr Sencer’s CDC also helped create the advertising to get the public to take the shot. Let me read to your from one of your own agency’s memos planning the campaign to urge Americans to take the shot. “The swine flu vaccine has been taken by many important persons,” he wrote. “Example: President Ford, Henry Kissinger, Elton John, Muhammad Ah, Mary Tyler Moore, Rudolf Nureyev, Walter Cronkite, Ralph Nader, Edward Kennedy” -etcetera, etcetera, True?

DR SENCER: I’m not familiar with that particular piece of paper, but I do know that, at least of that group, President Ford did take the vaccination.

WALLACE: Did you talk to these people beforehand to find out if they planned to take the shot?

DR SENCER: I did not, no.

WALLACE: Did anybody?

DR SENC ER: I do not know.

WALLACE: Did you get permission to use their names in your campaign?

DR SENCER: I do not know.

WALLACE: Mary, did you take a swine flu shot?

MARY TYLER MOORE: No, I did not.

WALLACE: Did you give them permission to use your name saying that you had or were going to?

MOORE: Absolutely not. Never did.

WALLACE: Did you ask your own doctor about taking the swine flu shot?

MOORE: Yes, and at the time he thought it might be a good idea. But I resisted it, because I was leery of having the symptoms that sometimes go with that kind of inoculation.

WALLACE: So you didn’t?

MOORE: No, I didn’t.

WALLACE: Have you spoken to your doctor since?



MOORE: He’s delighted that I didn’t take that shot.

WALLACE: You’re in charge. Somebody’s in charge.

DR SENCER: There are –

WALLACE: This is your advertising strategy that I have a copy of here.

DR SENCER: Who’s it signed by?

WALLACE: This one is unsigned. But you–you’ll acknowledge that it was your baby so to speak?

DR SENCER: It could have been from the Department of Health, Education and Welfare. It could be from CDC. I don’t know. I’ll be happy to take responsibility for it.

WALLACE: It’s been three years now since you fell ill by GBS right?


WALLACE: Has the federal government, in your estimation, played fair with you about your claim?

ROBERTS: No, I don’t think so. It seems to be dragging on and on and on, and really no end in sight that I can see at this point.

JOSEPH CALIFANO: With respect to the cases of Guillain Barre…

WALLACE: Former Secretary of HEW Joseph Caifano, too was disturbed that there was no end in sight. So a year and a half ago, he proposed that Uncle Sam would cut the bureaucratic red tape for victims suffering from GBS and would pay up quickly.

CALIFANO: We shouldn’t hold them to an impossible or too difficult standard of proving that they were hurt. Even if we pay a few people a few thousand dollars that might not have deserved it, I think justice requires that we promptly pay those people who do deserve it.

WALLACE: Who’s making the decision to be so hard-nosed about settling?

CALIFANO: Well, I assume the Justice Department is.

WALLACE: Griffin Bell, before he left?

CALIFANO: Well, the Justice Department agreed to the statement I made. It was cleared word for word with the lawyers in the Justice Department by my HEW lawyers.

CALIFANO: That-that statement said that we should pay Guillain Barre claims without regard to whether the federal government was negligent, if they – if they resulted from the swine flu shot.

GENE ROBERTS: I think the government knows its wrong.

JUDY ROBERTS: If it drags out long enough, that people will just give up, let it go.

GENE ROBERTS: I—I am a little more adamant in my thoughts than my wife is, because I asked – told Judy to take the shot. She wasn’t going to take it, and she never had had shots. And I’m mad with my government because they knew the fact, but they didn’t realize those facts because they – if they had released them, the people wouldn’t have taken it. And they can come out tomorrow and tell me there’s going to be an epidemic, and they can drop off like flies to – next to me, I will not take another shot that my government tells me to take.

WALLACE: Meantime, Judy Roberts and some 4,000 others like her are still waiting for their day in court.

Note: To watch this video clip online, click here. For more reliable reasons not to trust the government when it tells you to take a vaccine, click here and here.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »