Superbug killer found in rockpool
CNN, Thursday, February 27, 2003 Posted: 5:35 AM EST (1035 GMT)
EDINBURGH, Scotland — Scientists may have found the answer to Britain’s most dangerous hospital superbug — in slime taken from Scottish rock pools.

A reader sent me the superbug CNN article when it was published last Thursday. Medical error is the third leading cause of death in the United State and a major component of that error is nosocomial infections (you get sick because you are in the hospital with bugs you did not have when you entered the hospital). Dr. Starfield, at Johns Hopkins, reports that there are about 80,000 deaths each year from nosocomial infections in the U.S. alone. CNN notes that the staphylococcus bacteria accounts for almost half of all UK hospital infections. In the U.S., MRSA accounts for about 25% of infections, or 20,000 deaths a year. The drug companies are hot on the trail of yet a better antibiotic.

There are so many interesting questions about this bug and avoidance or treatment of antibiotic-resistant infections in general that I will take several postings to comment on even a few items.

1. What is the electronic resonant frequency of MRSA, and can it easily be killed by a frequency generator or Rife machine?
2. Why are nasty bugs like this most prevalent in hospitals?
3. What alternative strategies could we take to avoid evolving nasty, resistant bug strains in the future?
4. What easy nutritional aid could be given to hospital patients that is proven in clinical trials and would drastically reduce the number of infections by this bug. What is the probability of getting this nutritional aid if you go into the hospital? Is failure to provide proven treatments common in medicine today? Is failure to provide this assistance malpractice?
5. Do you have this bug in your system? Should you eliminate it? What could you do if you get it and treatment with antibiotics is futile?

It is well known in the homeopathic lore that one disease tends to come to the foreground and others are suppressed. My experiments indicate that many of the symptoms used for homeopathic diagnosis are related to micoorganisms and that giving the right remedy kills or moves around the microorganisms changing the symptoms. In any event, I spent 8 years funded by the National Cancer Institute doing research on colon cancer and here is an example where one disease suppresses another.

The epidemilogy of colon cancer showed that it was less in underdeveloped countries and one of the theories was that a high fiber diet was the cause. Well fiber may be good for you as well, but a new study shows that a bad bug, EPEC, induces resistance to colon cancer. EPEC is a significant health threat in the developing world and causes sporadic but deadly outbreaks of hemorrhagic colitis and hemolytic-uremic syndrome in North America and other developed areas.

Coliforms crush colon cancer: Bacterial enterotoxins can induce resistance to colorectal cancer.

By Tudor P Toma, The Scientist Daily News, 11 Feb 2003

The incidence of colorectal cancer — a major cause of mortality in industrialized nations — is lowest in developing countries, where high levels of enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli (ETEC) infection are seen. Whilst it has been thought that there is a link between cancer and ETEC, the mechanisms that underlie this inverse relationship have been poorly understood. In the February 10 Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, G. M. Pitari and colleagues at the Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, USA, show that a bacterial heat-stable enterotoxin suppresses colon cancer cell proliferation by a guanylyl cyclase C-mediated (GC-C) signaling cascade.

In discussions with FSCAN owners, some users are concerned if they test positive for a known organism. Many organisms are quite common and you will probably find them if you scan for their frequencies. Heliocobacter pylori is a good example. Most people have this organism is their bodies in small quantities and do not have ulcers, even though this organism causes ulcers.

However, if you scan and find this organism and then eliminate it, you remove virtually all of the risk of getting an ulcer. If every one did this, it could eliminate more than 50% of the ulcers in the population, maybe close to 100%.

How bacteria induce stomach ulcers: Bacterial cytotoxin induces the epithelial cell detachment that leads to ulcer formation. By Jonathan Weitzman

Helicobacter pylori is a Gram-positive bacterium that colonizes the gut mucosa and can induce gastric ulcers. In an Advanced Online Publication in Nature Genetics, Akihiro Fujikawa and colleagues report how the H. pylori cytotoxin VacA causes ulcer formation (Nature Genetics, DOI:10.1038/ng1112, 24 February, 2003).

It is ironic that the recently DNA sequenced “cancer germ” is exempted from toxic control by EPA because it is so ubiquitous in the environment!

Arrow scientific reports that:

Bacillus licheniformis is a Gram-positive, motile, spore-forming, facultatively anaerobic rod. Information regarding Bacillus licheniformis in relation to food safety is limited. Food poisoning by Bacillus licheniformis is characterised by diarrhoea, although vomiting occurs in half of reported cases. Bacillus licheniformis food poisoning has been associated with cooked meat, poultry and vegetable dishes (particularly stews and curries which have been served with rice).

I have seen everyone eating a good steak dinner become infected with this organism. You must take responsibility for your own health as your doctor will not test for this infection and the government does not control the use of this organism in industry. In the 1940’s, New York hospitals were curing ulcers with antibiotics. It took over 50 years before the medical community would consider that an ulcer could be caused by a microorganism. I suspect that it will be at least 2050 before this organism is accepted as a causative factor in most cancers. Meanwhile, you are on your own.

Bacillus Licheniformis TSCA Section 5(h)(4) Exemption: Final Decision Document

1. Risks from use of the recipient microorganism B. licheniformis are low. B. licheniformis is ubiquitous in the environment and the releases expected from fermentation facilities will not significantly increase populations of this microorganism in the environment. Although the possibility of human infection by B. licheniformis is not non-existent, it is low in the industrial setting, because it occurs primarily in highly immunocompromised individuals. Infection might be a possibility following trauma, but in the industrial setting with the use of proper safety precautions, good laboratory practices, and proper protective clothing and eyewear, the potential for infection of workers should be quite low. Although B. licheniformis may be associated with livestock abortions, the use of this microorganism in fermentation facilities will not substantially increase the frequency of this occurrence.

2. Use of strains of B. licheniformis which are eligible for the TSCA section 5(h)(4) exemption present no unreasonable risk. While not completely innocuous, B. licheniformis presents low risk of adverse effects to human health or the environment. Because the recipient microorganism was found to have little potential for adverse effects, introduced genetic material meeting the specified criteria would not likely significantly increase potential for adverse effects. As further assurance that risks would be low, EPA is specifying procedures for minimizing numbers of organisms emitted from the facility for the Tier I exemption and will be reviewing the conditions selected for the Tier II exemption.

Bacillus licheniformis in fungus-like form. Photo by Milton Wainwright

A tremendously significant finding was published in Lancet this month. What appears to be the Rife “filterable bacteria” was isolated and DNA sequenced by British researchers. Bacillus licheniformis is a pleomorphic organism that appears as rods, cocci, and fungus-like forms. Rife had a very difficult time culturing this organism in the 1920’s and people have had limited success since then, so demonstrating non-contaminated multiple forms of the same organism with exactly the same DNA sequence is a major accomplish that could end decades of controversy.

Sansom, Clare. “Cancer Germ” Bacteria Isolated. THE LANCET Oncology, Vol 4 February 2003, p. 63.

(You will need to create a free Lancet account to view this document.)

Milton Wainwright had already published data previously showing bacteria can pass through very small holes (as noted by Rife) and that this has major implications for their role as pathogens. See: Med Hypotheses 2002 Jun;58(6):558-60.

In my view, scanning and eliminating this bacterium in the general population could reduce the incidence of cancer and improve survival of cancer patients by more than 50%. This is based on my on my own research and that of hundreds of investigators trying to replicate Rife’s early work on successful treatment of cancer patients with electronic devices.

The reason this finding is extremely important is that the incidence of cancer has been increasing for the past few decades and no significant reduction in overall survival rates has been achieved since Richard Nixon launched the multi-billion dollar “war on cancer” a generation ago. My Ph.D. thesis advisor and co-author (a MacArthur Fellow and former Editor of the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, and statistical editor of the New England Journal of Medicine) reported no signficant increase in survival rates in cancer patients some years ago, and I don’t think things have changed much since, except for isolated cancer types.

Bailar, JC 3rd, Smith EM. Have we reduced the risk of getting cancer or of dying from cancer? An update. Med Oncol Tumor Pharmacother 1987;4(3-4):193-8.

We have examined trends in cancer mortality, incidence and survival in the United States to update our earlier work and respond to criticisms. [Bailar, J.C., Smith, E.M.: New Engl. J. Med. 314, 1226 (1986).] Here we concentrate on the years 1975-1984, and show that overall cancer mortality has increased, incidence has increased and case survival is virtually unchanged. This generally unfavorable picture is scarcely changed when lung cancer is excluded from the trends. While trends for individual cancers have been mixed, overall progress in both curative treatment and prevention has been minimal. This evaluation does not deny the marked progress in treating some uncommon forms of cancer, improved palliation, reduced extent or severity of treatment, or benefits of cancer research that can be applied in other areas of medicine. While our finding of limited progress is not new, we believe that it requires increased attention in setting the course of future research initiatives, demonstration programs, medical training and clinical practice.

A key area of future research is developing the means to eliminate the Rife pathogen, now almost certainly known to be Bacillus licheniformis, and electronic medicine is the most effective means at present.

There is a circular magnetic disk attachment to the FSCAN that is useful for eliminating pathogens. Previous studies mentioned on this site have noted that both magnetic and electrical oscillating fields affect microorganisms with the magnetic field being the most important, at least for some organisms. Here is a study from Washington University showing how this effect can be used to treat malaria.

The approach in the article does not eliminate all the malaria parasite, but enough to control it. There is a good argument as to the mechanism. To eliminate all of the malaria parasite, you would need the exact frequency of the parasite for each stage of its life cycle and use plate zapping to eliminate it in places where it would hide out.

Magnets may revolutionize malaria treatment

Researchers at the University of Washington have discovered a method of treating malaria with magnetic fields that could prove revolutionary in controlling the disease the World Health Organization calls one of the world’s most complex and serious human health concerns.

Henry Lai, UW research professor of bioengineering, says the malaria parasite Plasmodium appears to lose vigor and can die when exposed to oscillating magnetic fields, which Lai thinks may cause tiny iron-containing particles inside the parasite to move in ways that damage the organism.

“If further studies confirm our findings and their application in animals and people, this would be an inexpensive and simple way to treat a disease that affects 500 million people every year, almost all in third-world countries,” Lai said. According to the World Health Organization, as many as 2.7 million people die of malaria every year, approximately 1 million of those children.

Recently, I have received several questions about what electronic devices are useful for eliminating infections. My answer might be of general interest. I can only comment on devices I use regularly.

From: Jeff Sutherland

Sent: Monday, January 20, 2003 10:40 AM

To: ‘Research Colleague’

Subject: RE: What Electronic Devices Do You Find Useful?

I use three devices regularly, an FSCAN, an F155, and Stenulson’s EM5C+. The 6C+ you mention is a slightly enhanced version. (I have no financial interest in any of these devices and am only a user.)

The F155 cost $300, Stenulson’s systems cost about $2000, and the FSCAN costs close to $4000.

The F155 seems to be a better treatment device than the FSCAN due to the programmability of the device. However, it does not do diagnostics like the FSCAN. You must run it with a computer or a Palm Pilot.

The FSCAN runs by itself but it is far preferable to run it by computer. Particularly since the FSCAN has a diagnostic capability that the other devices do not with its DIRP function (which detects resonant frequencies of micro-organisms). The computer software generates charts and graphs when running DIRP so you can see peaks that may be microorganisms and then you can treat at those peaks. Interpreting the peaks is not a trivial exercise as there are artifacts induced by ions and other factors.

I determine frequencies for myself with a Cameron Aurameter, a dowsing device, which is extremely accurate for me but may not work for everyone. If you have a method to determine frequencies, the F155 device is the obvious choice because of its excellent electronics, ease of programming, and effects you can generate with the device through programming. And it is inexpensive.

I bought the EM5C+ in order to get a more powerful device than could penetrate deep into tissue, particularly for prostate treatment. My tests indicate that it is about 10 times as powerful as the FSCAN on the lowest setting, and over 1000 times as powerful on the highest setting. It only treats up to 10000HZ, however, so you cannot treat directly in the Clark frequency range which I can do with the FSCAN or F155. Because this is a powerful device, it should only be used with care by a knowledgeable person. Although I have never seen the device cause any harm, there are anecdotes about side effects caused by rapid killing of a serious infection. A Herxheimer’s Reaction can sometimes be a powerful effect and you must be able to moderate it.

Treating Lyme disease requires identifying all the co-infections and knocking them out simultaneously. The F155 is most effective for this if you have all of the exact frequencies. This is because it is easy to write a program that will treat many different frequencies simultaneously. Finding those frequencies may be a difficult job and may take a long period of trial and error.

I believe malaria could be effectively treated with any of these devices. The strategy is to determine the exact frequencies for each stage of the life cycle of the parasite. There may be different frequency sets for different strains. And then you must use plate zapping, otherwise you cannot get enough energy transfer into internal organs where the parasite can hide.

This raises another question about the EM6C+ device. By itself, you must adjust frequencies manually, which is very tedious. It is best driven by an F155 device. So that would suggest that getting an F155 device first might be the best course if you can only get one.

I have not had direct experience with other devices so I can’t really comment on them. I selected the Stenulson device because of its ability to do direct contact without harming the skin. I felt safer with that device than an RF unit.

I hope this doesn’t raise more questions than it answers.

Regards,

Jeff Sutherland

In talking with people about innovations in medicine that are not considered part of the conventional paridigm, I often get a irrational response of dismissal that is more like discussing the Hindu faith with a Catholic. People have fundamental convictions about medicine that are ineradicable, even though the scientific evidence shows it takes an average of 17 years for new clinical findings to find their way into standard clinical practice. This conservative approach can be helpful (in the case of snake oil salesman) or deadly, since the third leading cause of death in the United States is clearly medical error. See JAMA, July 26, 2000—Vol 284, No. 4, p. 483. An even larger number of deaths are caused by improper clinical protocols that do not follow currently accepted evidenced-based standards of practice. The number of deaths caused by alternative paridigms is vanishingly small and in many cases, it is difficult to document a single death caused by an alternative procedure like acupuncture, most herbal or nutritional treatments, electronic therapy with low voltage devices, or chiropractic care.

So it was with some interest that I read Olivier Clerc’s essay on medicine as the new world religion published at Dr. Mercola’s web site. The text first appeared in CONTINUUM Magazine and is the introduction to the book “Médecine, Religion et Peur; l’influence cachée des croyances” by Olivier Clerc. The book has been published with Editions Jouvence, 1999. France. Olivier Clerc has been working for 20 years in the field of alternative medicine, spirituality and personal development, as author, translator, journalist and publisher.

“When the Christian missionaries of the last three or four centuries were evangelizing so-called “primitive people,” they believed that they had only to destroy or burn the various cult objects of these people in order to eradicate their religions, superstitions and customs.

Centuries after the conquistadors tried to stamp out the Inca culture, or the Inquisition tried to stamp out the protestant ‘heresies,’ or the similar attempts to annihilate the Voodoo or the many African and Asian religions, we know that such arrogant high-handedness does not work. These beliefs still continue today, sometimes under different guises, long after the objects of worship associated with them have been destroyed.

This lesson from history is not only valid for primitive people and their religions. It can equally be applied — if not more so — to aspects of our own modern society. Indeed, even a superficial study of contemporary culture will reveal that the supposed secularization of present day society is just an illusion. Even though most people do not conform to the outward show of religious custom and practice — mostly Judeo-Christian in western culture — the beliefs and superstitions remain deeply embedded in their subconscious, influencing many aspects of their daily lives without them realizing it.

And as several sociology studies have shown, the superstitious beliefs that used to be attached to the formal religions have in many cases simply been transferred to other objects, persons or events. The daily evening television news bulletins, watched by millions worldwide in their respective countries, the stars of show-business and sport, humanitarian associations, cults and all sorts of other things in modern life have now become the new gods we venerate or fear, or the shrines at which we worship or curse, and where we still experience those primitive religious urges and feelings where we can believe without necessarily having to think or rationalize.

However, it is in the field of medicine that this unconscious transposition of the religious experience — and more specifically the Judeo-Christian ideology, myths, beliefs, expectations and hopes — seems to have had the greatest impact. The facts show clearly — for anyone taking the time to study them — that medicine today enjoys an astonishing degree of undeserved credit that is out of all proportion to its actual results or promises.

Real health keeps regressing while the great medical “miracles,” such as vaccines and antibiotics, are now clearly showing their limitations, which some had foreseen and warned of right from the start. This undeserved credit comes mostly from the fact that medicine and science have replaced religion as the only certain belief in an uncertain world… Almost imperceptibly medicine has taken on a saving or messianic role, the characteristics of which we must examine. Looking back through history, there is a sense in which medicine can be said to have displayed characteristics that have at various times characterized the Roman Catholic Church:

Autocracy

Centralization

The control and manipulation of people

Censorship

Propaganda

Total obedience

Infallibility

The destruction of heretics

The stamping out of individuality

All this, of course, has been done in the name of public health and the general good, just as the church acted for mankind’s salvation…”

The Editors of Scientific American weighed in on scam perpetrated on the public by our congressional lawmakers. “No one–not Eli Lilly, not administration officials, not committee members who oversaw the bill–will admit to having inserted the vaccine rider. It just appeared, a Thanksgiving miracle for drugmakers.”

So we have a law that noone ever saw or ever wrote appearing in a bill that the President signed! Maybe he didn’t read it either so he won’t admit to have seen it. Alas, the Scientific American editors say it best (and they are supported by the National Institute of Medicine on the possible link between vaccines and autism):

“Critics may gripe about whether the new Homeland Security Act fights terrorsim well, but no one can say it doesn’t do a great job of protecting drug companies from autistic children.

A short provision at the end of the act, added quietly just days before its passage, exempts Eli Lilly and other firms from direct civil litigation over whether vaccine additives cause autism. Parents suing on behalf of their autistic children are shunted to a federal “vaccine court,” where damages are capped. Conveniently, in late November 2002 the Justice Department also requested that the court seal documents relating to hundreds of the lawsuits, complicating the cases for plaintiffs.

Ever since these shameful developments became public, they have drawn bipartisan scorn. Beyond the provision’s offensiveness as political pork, it is harmful to lifesaving vaccination efforts.

Worries about childhood vaccines and autsim stretch back for years. Studies suggess that rates of autism may have as much as tripled in the past decade. Autism’s first symptoms often emerge around age two, shortly after most infants start to receive vaccinations against measles, whooping cough and other illnesses. Because the number of vaccinations that children receive has also skyrocketed, concerned parents sought a linkage, and they found one in thimerosal, a mercury compound used as a preservative in many vaccines. Some symptoms of autism resemble those of mercury poisoning.”