Gemini Press

Brief Summaries

Summaries that challenge conventional medical thinking


Editorial Archive TOC
  Editorial 'Dailies' TOC

Holistic Health
  Information and Literature
Brief Summaries
  Health Care Reform

Politics and Business
  Elite Agenda and M-O
Elite SymptomsTOC

Internet Resources

Recommended Reading

Graphic/Page Design
  Services and Samples

Check This Out
Yurko Project
(Off-Site Link)

Gemini Scan/Artwork

General Disclaimer

Any health information provided here is for educational purposes only.

(Go to HIV/AIDS )

The Dark Closet of Medical Biology

(© 1998, Peter G. Tocci, BA, MT Gemini Press )

Most people have heard the name Louis Pasteur. His last name became the root word for pasteurization, the heat-sterilization of beverages, especially milk. A chemist in nineteenth century France with no training in life sciences, Pasteur is credited with discovering that microorganisms, or microscopic beings (germs - hereafter called microbeings), are the cause of diseases defined as infectious. This discovery, known as the germ theory of disease, says that fixed species of microbeings from an external source invade the body and cause specific diseases.

This concept became the foundation of western medicine and microbiology in late nineteenth-century Europe. While it seems so obviously true, germ theory presents important anomalies and inconsistencies; and certain scientific observations must be ignored or left unexplained in order to maintain its complete acceptance.

In contrast, another name from nineteenth century France lingers in near-total obscurity - Antoine Béchamp: Master of Pharmacy, Doctor of Science, Doctor of Medicine; Fellow and Professor of Physics (medicines) and Toxicology (Higher School of Pharmacy, Town of Strasbourg); Professor of Medical Chemistry and Pharmacy (Univ of Montpellier); Professor of Biological Chemistry, Dean of the Faculty of Medicine (Univ of Lille).

A genius of considerable accomplishment, Béchamp solved the mystery of fermentation, identifying it as a process of digestion by microbeings. He was the first to assert that blood is a flowing tissue, not a mere liquid. And he developed a chemical process that launched the entire dye industry. Despite these accomplishments, and many others which filled eight pages of a scientific journal when he died, Béchamp has suffered oblivion in general history texts, as well as in scientific literature, biology textbooks, and even encyclopedias.

The apparent reason for this is that to examine Béchamp's science, and that period of history, reveals that Pasteur "borrowed" Béchamp's discoveries about microbeings and the nature of life, and presented them as his own (but with flawed understanding) to the French Academy of Science. Thus arose the apparently true, extremely lucrative, yet superficial and dangerous, germ theory.

Béchamp's fundamental assertion about microbeings and disease was that the latter is a set of circumstances (the disease condition itself) that encourages and supports the former. What we usually call diseases are symptoms of this deeper, underlying condition, as is the presence of the morbid microbeings themselves (see Holistic Health Literature for more on this).

Other aspects of Béchamp's theory were: 1) Though "germs" exist in the air, they are not necessary for symptoms to arise, because in the disease condition, disease-related microbeings can develop within higher organisms, including humans; 2) All organized beings contain microscopic anatomical elements called microzymas (small ferments). These are irreducible, imperishable "life units" that are the builders and destroyers of cells and tissue. They can also evolve into bacteria when the body's internal environment (which Béchamp referred to as the terrain) is stressed or unbalanced.

Whether or not the microzyma exists has not been scientifically determined or verified. Nor has it been disproven. But terrain condition is unquestionably highly significant in health and in the disease process. Immune function is affected by terrain condition, and vice versa. But non-specific, or 'humoral' immunity is the primary mode of immune 'defense,' because it monitors the terrain on an ongoing basis. Specific, or 'antibody-mediated' immune function, must be 'learned' by the cells to be optimally effective. Thus, to oversimplify a little, as a 'defense' mode, specific immune function, is secondary to non-specific immunity and to general terrain condition.

It seems unusual that Antoine's name and his controversial ideas have been omitted from mainstream literature. He presented, at the least, a fascinating point of view (amply supported by his detailed experimentation) deserving of academic recognition, as one would study the writings of various philosophers, for example. Given the magnitude and number of Béchamp's discoveries, it is fair to ask if this omission is not mere oversight.

Money and greed cannot be ruled out as motives for unflagging adherence to germ theory and its application in modern medicine. In the last hundred years, trillions of worldwide vested-interest dollars have depended upon such adherence and upon the ignore-ance of life principles suggested scientifically by Béchamp.

It can be argued effectively that orthodox medical practice, based as it is upon the half-true germ theory, has resulted in the current wave of chronic degenerative disease, including cancer, cardiovascular disease and AIDSyndrome. To learn more about this situation, its ramifications for human health, and to obtain sources for further material about Béchamp and by him, order the Holistic Health Literature, or contact Peter at Gemini.

HIV/AIDS - A Preposterous Theory

(C 1998, Peter G. Tocci, BA, MT Gemini Press )

"If there is evidence that HIV causes AIDS, there should be scientific documents which either singly or collectively demonstrate that fact, at least with a high probability. There is no such document."
Dr. Kary Mullis, Biochemist, 1993 Nobel Prize for Chemistry.

Challenging the HIV/AIDS hypothesis is not to suggest that AIDSyndrome is imaginary, or that people are not getting sick and dying. It does suggest that the situation is not what the medical establishment and the government would have us believe. It suggests also that if we continue to believe and act upon what we're being told, the sickness and dying will worsen.

The two greatest misrepresentations are that the syndrome is caused by a virus and that it is incurable. A third misrepresentation, promulgated in the beginning to generate fear, but shortly thereafter proving itself a false embarrassment, is that AIDSyndrome is universally fatal. Not to be caught short, however, mainstream medicine has turned things around, claiming that its treatments are the reason for the failure of its early pronouncement to come true.

1) HIV (Human Immunodeficiency Virus) has never been proven to cause immune collapse, or any so-called 'disease' associated with AIDSyndrome, in humans or animals. As mentioned above, HIV/AIDS is a hypothesis, and not one scientific paper exists to prove it. Rather than scientific proof in the early days, a pronouncement was handed down from Health and Human Services, whose cancer labs control all AIDS research in the US.

HIV/AIDS was accepted on faith and with insufficient scrutiny. This has crippled research with narrow focus, even in the face of obvious inconsistencies, including the fact that no virus in history so defies every 'law' of biology and virology. Also, the history of the discovery of the virus is tainted with intrigue. The official storyline is a convention created to avoid embarrassment to the scientific community.

The anti-HIV position is held in considerable contempt by researchers, and there are now about 10,000 of them on the planet. Since so many careers depend upon HIV being the cause, it seems unlikely that such a glut of vested interest would be ready to listen to a potentially career-threatening point of view.

Immune theory is based upon germ theory (see Medical Biology's Dark Closet above). Though apparently "gospel," both are highly questionable, and anyone who is serious about solving AIDS would do well at least to entertain the questions and to look at the theory and research behind them with an open mind. One question is, how can a virus that infects one in 500 immune cells, and which is so painfully difficult to find, even in the sickest of individuals, cause such massive destruction?

The germ-theory mindset has become a paradigm, or guiding model, for medical philosophy, leaving the residual notion that we are attacked by specific diseases. The victim/war mentality permeates society. This situation is itself a disease condition wherein 'victims' fight wars against attack by 'disease' entities, such as germs or cancer. By contrast, the Holistic view suggests that self-responsible people encourage their health, rather than waging wars against symptomatic windmills.

Because of common notions based upon germ theory, most people are unaware of their ill health until obvious symptoms appear; and they don't believe they're ill until that happens. This is an erroneous and dangerous mindset. Another basic question is whether specific, or antibody-mediated, immune function really makes us healthy or whether it only slows the process of becoming sicker than we already are. Is it the primary defense against infection, or could it be a backup system? The latter view suggests that by trying only to build up or 'stimulate' specific immunity, we are riding around on the spare tire without getting the flat fixed. This obviously leads to the question, "What is the 'first line of defense' in the body?"

2) Is AIDS incurable? 'Cures', or remissive therapies, do exist outside of orthodox medicine, and they have worked well in clinical situations on diagnosed, 'full-blown' cases. As with most so-called diseases, the 'no cure' status is true only within a narrow limit of methods, within a controlled definition of what is being cured, what is allowed to be called a cure, and what may be controlled financially by pharmaceutical interests and the medical establishment.

Unfortunately, there is more money in research and ineffective treatment than in any cure which might arise—in any venue, not just AIDS. Though this may seem a harsh judgment, there is ample evidence to support it. The mainstream media does not investigate this.

3) Should we be intimidated by the threat of universal fatality with HIV/AIDS? Fear propaganda has accompanied the syndrome from the outset and may contribute substantially to the 'obedient death,' if you will, of people with AIDS. In this writer's opinion, and that of many other observers and researchers, people have died of this mental conditioning and of the ineffective, poisonous, orthodox treatments that accompany diagnosis. For example, AZT death was indistinguishable from AIDS death. In more recent times, there has been a shift to the idea of living with AIDS, which has eased the pressure for some patients. But residual fear remains, based on insufficient knowledge.

"If there is evidence that HIV causes AIDS, there should be scientific documents which either singly or collectively demonstrate that fact, at least with a high probability. There is no such document."
Dr. Kary Mullis, Biochemist, 1993 Nobel Prize for Chemistry.

For further information on these matters and more, click here.

Archive of Editorial Letters

Peter G. Tocci is a Holistic wellness consultant and health writer dba Associated Health Services in Leominster, Massachusetts.

Check out Holistic Health Information

Associated Health Services

Gemini Press

E-mail for both:
Or Send S-mail:
Peter G. Tocci
22 Walker St. #2
Leominster, Mass. USA 01453


Page Top