by Cilla Whatcott, HD RHom, CCH, PhD
We’ve been arguing about germs for a long time.
They first said germs do not exist
Ignaz Semmelweis (1816-1865), a Hungarian physician, died in an insane asylum in 1865 at the age of 47. He was committed there for suggesting that childbed fever and deaths were being caused by germs; germs on the filthy hands of doctors dissecting cadavers and then immediately delivering babies.
After hand washing protocols were implemented, the mortality rate dropped from 18.3% to 1.3% to zero.
The medical and scientific communities were highly offended at Semmelweis’ suggestion that they should wash their hands.
They then said germs do exist
Not long after, a German and a Frenchman were revered for their “discovery” of germs.
French chemist and microbiologist, Louis Pasteur (1822-1895), was engaged by the French wine industry to identify the process of fermentation. It was all about the wine. He developed ways to prevent wine from being contaminated by unwanted microorganisms. For the love of wine, “pasteurization” was born.
Robert Koch (1843-1910), a German microbiologist took it a step further by identifying the relationship between specific germs and diseases. He devised a method for testing which germ caused which disease and “Koch’s Postulates” were born. These four postulates are worth examining more closely, as they inform the battle-ready stance against bugs that prevails to this day.
Koch nabbed the bacteria responsible for dreaded tuberculosis, winning him the Nobel Prize for advancing this newfound knowledge that germs caused disease.
With germs as culprits, we began to vaccinate
Prior to Pasteur’s and Koch’s research efforts, the English physician Edward Jenner (1749-1823) was experimenting with cows. He observed that milkmaids who contracted cowpox, a relatively mild disease, were immune to deadly smallpox. One such milkmaid caught cowpox from Blossom, her dairy cow.
Jenner took pus from the milkmaid’s sores and rubbed it onto a scratch on a subject’s arm. His subject, James Phipps, did indeed come down with a mild case of cowpox, and this is where it gets interesting.
Jenner then intentionally infected James with smallpox. The boy’s enhanced immunity was able to resist the smallpox virus and he didn’t get sick. Presto! The first “vaccine” was born in 1796; the word coming from the Latin ‘vacca’ meaning cow, and administered with a novel process.
This process of ‘attenuation’ is still used today in the manufacture of live virus vaccines. Attenuation is the method of weakening a pathogen by passing it through another medium (i.e., animal, human, or insect cells).
The risk with using foreign media is the inevitability of also acquiring unknown viruses, including those common to species other than humans. We have seen numerous repercussions of this, for example, with the polio vaccine containing Simian Virus 40.
Germs can now be manipulated
At the same time, a medical doctor from Vienna, James Compton Burnett (1840-1901), expressed concern over the new practice of vaccination. Steeped in homeopathic theory, Burnett postulated that grafting a foreign disease onto the body would have far-reaching negative effects.
Vaccination is an example of an attempt to exercise domination over all pathogens, and insulate the human biome from perceived pathogenic effects; a delusion borne of pure hubris.
The human vital force is designed to acquire infectious contagious disease naturally. The innate wisdom of the vital force governs the physical body, the energy body, and the spiritual body. It has been doing an eloquent dance with the process of maturing the immune system since time began.
Learn more about the vital force here.
“Vaccinosis” is the grafting of a foreign disease onto the human being. It results from by-passing the normal mechanism of contracting disease – through mucosal membranes. Injecting pathogens directly into the bloodstream is an unnatural introduction. Have you noticed the increase in exaggerated forms of inflammation such as eczema, asthma, molluscum, and serious autoimmune irregularities?
This is because when you impose an immune challenge containing excipients and foreign mediums, bypassing the innate arm of the immune system, the humoral arm overreacts, thus producing the terrifying array of compensatory responses. The individual now has unfamiliar disease grafted upon the human biome.
Manipulating germs carries terrifying risks
This manipulation derails the brilliant design of Mother Nature and her natural evolution of immunity that’s taken place over millions of years. Burnett posited that homeoprophylaxis would be much safer and support the natural immune process.
Homeoprophylaxis aims to integrate and synchronize the human species with other life forms, in the most compatible way, instead of imposing separation.
In the late 1700’s, Samuel Hahnemann (1755-1843), physician, chemist, and linguist, discovered that his patient taking homeopathic belladonna was immune to the scarlet fever epidemic to which all her family members had succumbed. With this, the first “homeoprophylaxis” application was discovered. It continued to work prophylactically for others. The King of Prussia mandated its use in 1838 during an epidemic of scarlet fever.
Homeoprophylaxis collaborates with germs
Since there is no material substance in a homeopathic remedy, it does not act in a physiological manner. Rather, it is “energetic,” meaning the solution contains the frequency of the source material after being diluted repeatedly until no molecules remain.
And why is this important?
Because if we know that germs have existed, long before our knowledge of them, and that manipulation carries risk, then let’s not manipulate!
Mother Nature knows what she’s doing. The evolution of these microbes – bacteria and viruses – has occurred right alongside of humans. All life forms have a place, are interrelated, and we will never understand the full implications of manipulating them to what we assume is our benefit.
Homeoprophylaxis honors this relationship with other organisms. Instead of manipulation, it offers cooperation. By introducing the frequency of a pathogen to the human organism, a recognition takes place. It’s like downloading information.
According to Carlo Rubbia, Italian physicist and 1984 Nobel Laureate in physics, “Less than one billionth of the universe is matter – the rest is energy and information.”
Recognition of this information provides a reference point. When the pathogen is met in nature, its frequency is recognized. Either the human doesn’t contract the disease, or a natural and appropriate immune response takes place. Since studies have shown no antibody production with homeoprophylaxis, there is no artificial emphasis on the humoral arm of the immune system.
Natural immunity is the goal
Gustavo Bracho, PhD is an immunologist with the Findlay Institute in Havana, Cuba. In 2010 he injected rats with leptospirosis after orally dosing homeoprophylaxis. Eighty percent of the rats did not contract the disease and produced no antibodies!
I attended a conference where he provided an oral presentation of these results. The entire rat control group without homeoprophylaxis died.
Dr. Bracho and others explain that becoming familiar with the frequency of a disease confers all the benefits of receiving the wild disease, but without the risks. Since there is nothing material in the exchange, there is no resulting chaos from manipulation through attenuation, additives, or introduction in a way other than nature’s way by contraction through mucous membrane.
Homeoprophylaxis does not manipulate
We have a clear example of wreaking havoc by suppressing bacteria when antibiotics were the magical discovery of 1928 and in full-scale use by the 1940’s. Sure, they gave a one-two punch to the scourge of syphilis, but at what cost? It became too easy to simply prescribe antibiotics for every perceived infection.
When you reduce one population, another expands to take its place, and here we go again. Manipulation!
This has not been the case with over 200 years of clinical observation of homeoprophylaxis. In fact, based on Isaac Golden’s 15-year study with 3,000 children, more robust long-term health was observed in the homeoprophylaxis group than in unvaccinated children. Surprisingly, they experienced fewer ear infections, allergies, and eczema.
To ensure health, we must co-exist
By introducing pathogens in their energetic state, one disease at a time, there is no disruption of the natural relationship we share with these microbes.
We do not have all the answers. We never will. In the end, we benefit from the presence of these other life forms to communicate information, to digest our food, maintain homeostasis, and even shape emotional temperament.
They are in, on, and around us all the time, contributing to our immune maturation, and evolution. In fact, the human organism is made up of only 10% human cells; the rest is bacteria, viruses, fungi, and parasites.
Ponder the origin of mitochondria. According to the endosymbiotic hypothesis, cellular mitochondria closely resemble certain bacteria and this symbiotic relationship was almost surely formed millions of year ago in the process of evolution.
Our relationship with all other life forms is meant to reflect respect and mutual cooperation in order to assure the balance of life itself. Relating with pathogens as information is more beneficial, less invasive, and enables peaceful co-existence.
And only then can the war against disease end.
Cilla Whatcott, HD RHom, CCH, PhD is a board-certified classical homeopath, author, speaker, and mother of adopted children from around the world. She is the director of Worldwide Choice, offering supported programs in homeoprophylaxis for families. She is the executive producer of the film “Real Immunity,” due out in early 2018. Cilla has written several books including “There is a Choice: Homeoprophylaxis” with Dr. Isaac Golden. She’d love to hear from you at firstname.lastname@example.org.