chickenlil.org

Bacteria, Cancer and the Origin of Life
from New Dawn magazine (0nline) Check it out!
Part Two
By Alan Cantwell, Jr., M.D.After a century of "modern" medical science, we still don't know the cause
of cancer, heart disease, and many other chronic diseases that kill millions
of people every year. The reason for this, in my view, is that medical
science refuses to recognise the role that microbes (smaller than bacteria
and larger than viruses) play in these diseases.

Much of the fault lies in the dogma left over from the nineteenth
century by such scientific icons as Louis Pasteur and Robert Koch, who are
revered as fathers of microbiology and bacteriology. At a time when viruses,
nanobacteria and astrobiology were unknown and when "the germ theory of
disease" was in its infancy, both scientists held rigid views as to what was
possible and not possible in biology. And neither Pasteur nor Koch could
fathom the concept that living organisms might arise from non-living
sources.

Unfortunately, Pasteur (1822-1895) had no medical training. He was
consumed with fermentation experiments and with proving "air germs" were the
basis for human disease, although he provided no explanation for the origin
of atmospheric germs or how life began on Earth. Koch (1843-1910), who
discovered the bacteria that caused tuberculosis, was obsessed with
classifying microbes grown in the laboratory into exact species, depending
on their size, structure, physical, and chemical properties. He insisted the
species that were created were pure and stable; and that species were unable
to change back and forth between each other. According to Koch, each species
of bacteria produced a separate and distinct disease. Each germ also had to
originate from similar "parent" germs - which reproduced by dividing in half
by "binary fission."

Not every physician of that era believed all the pronouncements of
Pasteur and Koch. A few physician-scientists challenged them because they
knew what was often "proven" in laboratory experiments might not always be
applicable to what was going on with bacteria hidden within the human body.

Antoine Bechamp (1816-1908) was no slouch in the science department
and was well-known as a scientific rival of the famous Pasteur. The
Frenchman was not only a Doctor of Medicine and Science, but at various
times was also Professor of Medical Chemistry and Pharmacology, and
Professor of Physics, Toxicology, and Biological Chemistry. There is also
some evidence that Pasteur plagiarised much of Bechamp's original research.

Pasteur, however, is credited in history with saving the French beer
and wine and silkworm industries, and with pasteurisation and vaccine
research. Bechamp, despite his brilliance, was eventually eclipsed by the
younger man. The details of the scientific controversy and plagiarism
accusations are chronicled in E. Dougles Hume's book, Bechamp or Pasteur?: A
Lost Chapter in the History of Biology (1923), remarkably still in print.

Bechamp had his own ideas concerning the origin of life and the germ
theory of disease. In animal and plant cells he observed infinitesimal
microscopic "granulations" that he considered the incorruptible elements of
all life. After many laboratory experiments and microscopic examinations of
these granules, the physician-scientist claimed these so-called "microzymas"
were capable of developing into common living organisms that go by the name
of bacteria.

In his view, Pasteur's "air germs" had nothing to do with the origin
and appearance of these microzymas in tissue. In fact, Bechamp wrote that
Pasteur's air germs most likely derived from dying life-forms. Like Folk a
century later [see Part One of this article], Bechamp found barely visible
microzymas/bacteria in chalk and limestone that he interpreted as survivor
life-forms of past ages. Although all the microzymes looked similar, they
varied in their chemical abilities. Each tissue, or organ, or gland had
microzymas that differed from each other.

Hume claims Bechamp and his colleagues showed these tiny microzymas
were, in reality, "organised ferments" with the potential to develop into
bacteria. In this development, they passed through certain intermediary
stages. Some of these intermediate bacterial stages were regarded by people
like Koch as different species, but to Bechamp they were all related and
derived from microzymas. Adding more heresy to Pasteur's dogma, Bechamp
wrote that without oxygen, microzymas do not die - they go into a state of
rest. Bechamp preached, "Every living being has arisen from the microzymas,
and every living being is reducible to the microzymas."

Like Bechamp, Henry Charlton Bastian's (1837-1915) studies
investigating the origin of life were closely tied into his understanding of
the origin of infectious disease. He was also the last of the great
scientists to uphold the theory of "spontaneous regeneration", by concluding
that life could come from non-life. Like Reich a century later, he argued
that microorganisms were produced as by-products of the disease process, not
as opportunistic infections, but from degenerating tissue by a process
Bastian termed "heterogenesis." Heterogenesis is the idea that living
organisms can arise without parents from organic starting materials - an
idea certainly not in accord with Pasteur and Koch.

Bechamp and Bastian's research was also a threat to the followers of
Charles Darwin (1809-1882), whose evolution theories revolutionalised
science. Like Pasteur, Darwin was not a medical doctor and had no training
in human pathology. And while doctors like Bechamp and Bastian and others
were discovering new forms of life emanating from human diseased tissue and
from the bowels of limestone, Pasteur, Koch and the Darwinians simply
disregarded all this in favour of their own research and pronouncements.

Bastian paid dearly for his unorthodoxy (and for some well-publicised
but failed experiments) and his once-famous name is largely forgotten.
Microbiologist and science professor James Strick has recently revived
interest in Bastian's books and research and his books on the origin of
life; and a six-volume set reprinting much of his work has been recently
published. Strick is also the author of Sparks of Life (2000), which
chronicles the famous nineteenth century scientific and bacteriologic
debates over Darwinism and spontaneous generation.

Pleomorphism and the Classification of Bacteria

Koch, famous for his tuberculosis discoveries, was rigid in his belief
that a specific germ had only one form (monomorphism). And he opposed all
research showing some germs had more than one form (pleomorphism) and
complex "life cycles." Thus, from the very beginning of bacteriology there
was conflict between the monomorphists and the pleomorphists, with the
former totally overruling the latter and dominating microbiology to this
day.

In the attempt to "classify" bacteria as the lowest forms of life
known at that time, there was no consideration given to any possible
"connection" between the various species of bacteria. The dogma was that a
coccus remained a coccus; a rod remained a rod; and there was no interplay
between them. There was no "crossing" from one species to another, and the
research of the pleomophists suggesting otherwise was ignored.

When viruses were discovered they were made separate from bacteria,
although bacteria are also known to be susceptible to viral infection.
Viruses were put in one box; bacteria in another. As a result, the
spectacular number of "filterable" pleomorphic microbial forms that form a
bridge between the "living" bacteria and the "dead" viruses are still
largely unstudied and considered of no great importance in clinical
medicine.

Most doctors simply want to know the name of the microbe, if any,
cultured in the lab from their specimens; and what antibiotics the germ is
"sensitive" to. Thanks to Pasteur, common "skin" bacteria like cocci and
bacilli are often viewed as suspicious "contaminants" or "secondary
invaders" or "opportunistic infections" of no great importance as etiologic
agents.

Koch's postulates became dogma to prove that certain bacteria cause
disease, but the postulates did not work very well for viruses. And even
when "filterable" pleomorphic bacteria were shown to cause disease and Koch'
s postulates were fulfilled, the research was still generally ignored
because such germs were not considered "valid" life-forms.

As a result of all this dogma and rigidity, medical thought was
completely turned off to the possibility cancer was caused by bacteria. But
to the minds of some medical heretics, these century-old scientific beliefs
were wrong, wrong, wrong.

Cancer and the "Cancer Microbe"

As some scientists are finally realising, there is a large realm of
microbial life-forms that lie between "bacteria" and "viruses." It is this
relatively uncharted never-never land of microbiology that lies at the heart
of life, disease, cancer, death, regeneration, and perhaps even immortality.

In the life of every researcher there is a person or group of people
to whom a great debt is owed. In my scientific life as a practising
dermatologist and as a clinical researcher, there are four women who are my
icons in medical science. All four I knew personally as valued friends, and
each contributed greatly to my understanding of the greatest mystery of
medical science: the origin and cause of cancer.

The combined reported research of Virginia Wuerthele-Caspe Livingston
(a physician), Eleanor Alexander-Jackson (a microbiologist), Irene Diller (a
cell cytologist), and Florence Seibert (a chemist famous for developing the
TB skin test), is indeed a treasure-trove for anyone seeking to learn about
"the cancer microbe" and the heretical microbiology of cancer. I wrote about
these now deceased women in my book, The Cancer Microbe (1990), and I
connected their cancer research to Bechamp's and Bastian's discoveries in
the nineteenth century, as well as to Wilhelm Reich's condemned cancer and
orgone research.

In 1950, Wuerthele-Caspe Livingston and Alexander-Jackson, along with
John A. Anderson (head of the Department of Bacteriology at Rutgers), James
Hillier (head of electron microscopy at the RCA Victor Laboratories at
Princeton), Roy Allen (a cell histologist), and Lawrence W. Smith (author of
a well-known pathology textbook used in medical colleges), all combined
their talents to write a paper entitled "Cultural Properties and
Pathogenicity Obtained from Various Proliferative and Neoplastic [cancerous]
Diseases," published in the December issue of The American Journal of the
Medical Sciences. The characteristics of the cancer microbe in blood,
tissue, and culture, were described in detail; and the extreme pleomorphic
nature of the organism was revealed in photos taken with the electron
microscope at a magnification of 31,000X.

The cancer microbe (which she later called Progenitor cryptocides) was
filterable through a pore designed to hold back bacteria. But in the
filtrate were "virus-sized" microbial forms, which grew in time to the size
of conventional bacteria. For the next two decades these four women and
their colleagues continued publishing details about the microbiology of
cancer. Livingston's two books, Cancer: A New Breakthrough (1972) and The
Conquest of Cancer (1984) are unfortunately now out-of-print.

Livingston believed everyone carried cancer microbes in their blood
and tissues. And the microbe was essential for life. In 1974, she discovered
some cancer-associated bacteria produced an HCG-like hormone - the human
choriogonadotropin hormone, which is an essential hormone needed to start
life in the womb. But she also thought the microbe was the germ that did
most people in as they aged. The microbe was Mother Nature's built-in
terminator to force old people off the planet and to make room for new life
on the planet.

At the time of her death in 1990, Livingston was widely regarded among
the cancer establishment as a quack. Even though her research was published
for three decades in reputable medical journals, the American Cancer Society
still claims her "cancer microbe" does not exist. An ACS-sponsored Internet
web page states: "One report on the bacteria Progenitor cryptocides, which
Dr. Livingston-Wheeler claimed caused cancer, found that the bacteria does
not exist but is actually a mixture of several different types of bacteria
which Dr. Livingston-Wheeler labelled as one." Who was the author of the
report claiming her microbe did not exist? According to the ACS, the author
was "anonymous."

Over the past four decades I have tried to keep this research alive by
showing pleomorphic cancer bacteria in human cancer and in certain other
diseases of unknown origin. For readers with Internet access, some of my
photos of cancer microbes are presented on the web site of the on-line
Journal of Independent Medical Research (www.joimr.org); and abstracts of my
medical publications can be found on the National Library of Medicine's
"PubMed" web site (www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/PubMed/). Simply type in "A Cantwell
+ cancer bacteria".

In my research I have observed germs grown in the lab from cancerous
tissue. Frequently they grow as simple round cocci, or as a mixture of cocci
and rod-shaped bacilli, and rarely as streptococci. From diseases like
scleroderma, I have seen "old" cultures evolve into peculiar and highly
pleomorphic fungus-like "actinomycete" organisms, or evolve into bacteria
resembling tuberculosis-type bacteria. Not infrequently, expert
microbiologists could not agree on what to name these pleomorphic bacteria.

I have seen microbes change from one species to another, depending on
what they are fed in the laboratory - staphylococcus germs that turn into
rod-forms of corynebacteria and back again to "pure" staphylococcus,
depending on the lab media for growth. But most importantly, I have seen
these bacteria in specially-stained (acid-fast stain) tissue sections made
from cancerous tissue, indicating these microbes are not contaminants
falling out of the air. And decade after decade all cancer microbe research
remains forgotten, ignored, and overlooked because physicians cannot
conceive of such bacteria as causing cancer.

Milton Wainwright at the University of Sheffield, UK, is a rare
microbiologist who has written sympathetically about the bacteriology of
cancer, titling some of his recent publications: "Nanobacteria and
associated 'elementary bodies' in human disease and cancer" (1999); "The
return of the cancer germ; Forgotten microbiology - back to the future"
(2000); "Highly pleomorphic staphylococci as a cause of cancer" (2000); and
"Is this the historical 'cancer germ'"? (2003).

In, Can Bacteria Cause Cancer?: Alternative Medicine Confronts Big
Science (1997), David J. Hess charts the history of bacteria as etiological
agents in cancer. An anthropologist at Renssalear University, he claims this
research has not only been forgotten or disregarded, but actively
suppressed. Hess cites financial and professional interests, as well as more
general cultural factors to help explain the suppression.

Body Blood Bacteria

The idea that the blood contains bacteria related to cancer has been
repeatedly raised by various cancer microbe researchers. But the idea was
never taken seriously because bacteria grown from cancer patients were never
considered anything more than inconsequential bacteria like staph, strep,
and various common bacilli of no etiologic significance. Furthermore, these
bacteria are believed to be frequent laboratory 'contaminants.' Physicians
still expect disease-causing bacteria to be of a specific species type and
to cause a "specific" disease. And medical doctors believe each form of
cancer is "different." The variety of different species of pleomorphic
bacteria recovered from various forms of cancer makes physicians highly
dubious about a bona fide cancer microbe specific for cancer.

In a series of papers (1970-1979) using the electron microscope and
various testing procedures, an Italian team of researchers headed by Guido
G. Tedeschi showed that the erythrocytes (red blood cells) and the blood
platelets of both normal and diseased patients are cryptically infected with
pleomorphic bacteria. Electron-dense "granular bodies" were found within the
erythrocytes, and a variety of microbial forms and species were reported as
mycoplasma-like and corynebacteria-like L-forms of bacteria, staphylococcus
epidermidis, micrococci, cocci, and cocco-bacillary forms.

Such microbes are similar to what various cancer microbe researchers
have reported over the past century. Some of Tedeschi's microbes were
acid-fast, a staining quality characteristic of Livingston's cancer microbe.

All of this indicates that human blood is definitely not sterile, and
should raise suspicion these tiny blood bacteria could be involved in the
production of disease - a conclusion Wilhelm Reich came to a half-century
ago. Like Reich, Tedeschi's team suggested the evolution of cocci and
diphtheroids taking origin from cell-wall-deficient forms seems not to be
related to a particular state of illness, but to be the consequence of a
generalised crypto-infection.

A more recent study entitled "Are there naturally occurring
pleomorphic bacteria in the blood of healthy humans?", by R.W. McLaughlin
and associates in the Journal of Clinical Microbiology (December 2002),
confirms the presence of a wide diversity of microorganisms within the blood
of healthy people. And with new research showing nanobacteria in the blood,
it is apparent there is much to learn about the bacteriology of the blood
and what it contains normally and what it contains in disease.

As they have done for a century, microbiologists will undoubtedly
quibble about what to name these organisms. But what is much more important
than a name is to determine what they "do" - not in the laboratory, but in
the human body. What is the energy force that allows these microbes to exist
in harmony with us? And what turns them into killers?

Science, Soul, Spirit, and Immortality

Helena P. Blavatsky (1831-1891) is the controversial founder of the
science of Theosophy, a philosophical and spiritual group with a keen
interest in the origin of life. In researching this article, I came across
her name on a web page connected to Bastian's nineteenth century studies on
tiny bacteria in limestone. Her ideas about the origin of life are amazingly
prophetic in light of current findings of nanobacteria in microbiology and
geology, and her idea of a "vital force" seems similar to Reich's "orgone
energy."

Blavatsky wrote: "Life is not the expression of the organism, but, on
the contrary, the organism is the expression of some prior and
indestructible vital force. Nothing ever dies. Life's opposite is not death,
but latency. Indeed. one is compelled to ask whether all humanity, past and
future is not imprisoned in latent form in the rocks and sands of our
terrestrial sphere."

In The Secret Doctrine (1888), she claims: "Everything that is, was,
and will be, eternally IS, even the countless forms, which are finite and
perishable only in their objective, not in their ideal Form. They existed as
Ideas, in the Eternity, and, when they pass away, will exist as
reflections."

Science has little or nothing to say about spirit, soul, and the
hereafter. And skeptics are always seeking "proof." But if a disease like
cancer is indeed caused by microscopic bacteria, it would indicate
physicians have been unable to see what was quite plain for some nineteenth
and twentieth century scientists to observe using simple light microscopy.
And with powerful electron microscopes there is now little excuse for not
"seeing" bacteria. With this in mind, it would behoove scientists,
especially cancer experts, to do a little soul-searching (pun intentional).

In addition, scientists cannot seem to agree where life begins. So can
we trust them completely to know when life ends? If human life continues
after death, it must exist largely as energy. And can energy ever be
destroyed? Einstein tells us matter and energy are interconnected and
essentially different forms of the same thing. And physicists are excited
about the possibilities of quantum physics, which is beyond my ken.
Professor of Mathematical Physics, Frank Tipler, confidently proclaims
physics will lead to the immortality of humankind. In his controversial book
The Physics of Immortality (1994) he states, "Either theology is pure
nonsense, a subject with no content, or else theology must ultimately become
a branch of physics. The Goal of physics is understanding the ultimate
nature of reality. If God is real, physicists will eventually find Him/Her."

In the Bible, God tells us we came from dust - and to dust we shall
return, which is not terribly encouraging for those not confident about an
afterlife. But what if dust contained elements and building blocks that
could re-make life over and over again for all eternity? And isn't Earth
basically a big pile of dust? And couldn't this be "God's little secret" He
wants us to unravel?

And what is life if it is not pulsating with cosmic energy? If the
tiniest of life forms can exist in meteors millions or billions of years
old, and if we are composed and descended from the tiniest forms of life,
why can't we live forever?

All we might need is a speck of dust and a little "faith" to ignite
that spark of life that would get us going again.


____________________________________________________________________
Dr. Cantwell is a researcher on AIDS, cancer, and biological warfare. His
book on man-made AIDS, Queer Blood: The Secret AIDS Genocide Plot, is
available through the New Dawn Book Service. Many of his writings can be
found on google.com and the New Dawn web site. His published medical papers
are listed on PubMed.