Bacteria, Cancer & the Origin of Life By Alan Cantwell, Jr., M.D.

[Guest guest]

Bacteria, Cancer &

the Origin of Life

 

http://www.newdawnmagazine.com/articles/Bacteria%20Cancer%20 & %20the%20Origin

%20of%20Life%20-%20part%202.html

 

 

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.

[Guest guest]

> Bacteria, Cancer & the Origin of Life By Alan Cantwell, Jr., M.D.

 

The Cancer Microbe they're referring to has been captured on video

more than 1000 times, in every type of cancer. They can't exactly

name it but they know it's not a bacteria.

 

I have the footage on an English-subtitled VCD which will play on a

DVD player or on your computer, using Windows Media Player.

 

The movie shows these things spreading from cancer cell to adjacent

cell, and getting in, hosting in red blood cells, proliferating and

then breaking the cell, swimming against the current, and other

activity in both their thread and the round shape. Very interesting.

There's also a commentary on how these things get out of the

bloodstream and into the rest of the body.

 

I got my personal copy from the fella who made it (in German; he sent

me an overdubbed English copy) Send me $10 US and I'll burn a copy

and send it by mail anywhere in the world.

 

regards,

 

Duncan Crow