Would you like to make this site your homepage? It's fast and easy...
Yes, Please make this my home page!
This weeks feature - "Epidemics & germs - finale"
Epidemics & germs - finale 20 - 11 - 2003

Epidemics & germs - finale
Good day,
Last week's article was interrupted abruptly as it was getting
too long and I was afraid of boring you for too long. Today we
will just dive in and conclude this very important message.
" The modification or suppression of normal body function by
poisoning (with serums or drugs) is another factor in the epidemic
saga. Sometimes, when people are too drugged and devitalised,
they cannot have the healing crisis, even though elimination of
a high of a high accumulation of wastes is necessary. Because
vaccinations may so reduce vitality as to make it impossible to
conduct a simple eliminative crisis, vaccinated people are said
to be "immune" against the particular disease they have lost the
ability to conduct. In truth, the price of their inability to
dispose of the toxins at an early stage is their accumulation and
the insidious development of worse, and more serious, degenerative
diseases.
But what about the thousands of people who develop colds who have
not been in contact with someone with a cold? And what about the
thousands who are in intimate contact with someone with a cold
who do not develop a cold?
In 1967, after my 29-day fast, I worked in a small office with
several other people. Every one of them had repeated colds, some
developed flu; I was the only one who never had any such symptoms
and lost no time from work.
Physiological drainage is even more important than drainage of
swamps, and infinitely more important than germicides and
pesticides. The soil (in the body) is prepared for so-called
epidemic disease by failure to keep the fluids and tissues of
the body sweet and clean.
In 1850 when America suffered wit recurring epidemics of cholera,
it developed among the residents of sweltering and crowded
cities, and among the drunkards and the ill nourished.
A Life Scientists writing in 1851 about cholera says, " In New
York as in the Old World, the chief victims of the cholera came
from the same classes; the destitute poor, the badly fed, the
insufficiently clothed, the crowded, the dirty and the
intemperate.
The better fed, better housed, clean and temperate did not get
cholera. The same is true today: the enervated and toxaemic,
the weak and dissipated are sick. Those who live according to
the laws of nature are well.
Scarlet fever declined in incidence and virulence as rapidly
as did diphtheria - without a vaccine. Cholera, bubonic plague,
English sweat, and typhus fever declined and disappeared at the
same time as smallpox - only smallpox had a vaccine. Some
common factor must have been responsible for the total decline
- not an "immunising agent" used for diphtheria and smallpox and
not for the other diseases. Dr Shelton asks, "Is vaccination
merely a substitute for personal and community cleanliness?"
SUMMARY
The proven invalidity of the germ theory destroys the basis for
the popular conception that contagion is the primary cause of
epidemics. Healthy people need not fear contagion. Something of
the sort seems to occur when an extremely toxaemic person is
exposed to the diseased, and a needed healing crisis may thus
be triggered.
Disease is the result of many causes. The process of disease
(the fever, the inflammation, etc..) is body action to dispose
of morbid accumulation. The causes, the processes and the effects
may be all mixed up together, with constant and complicated
interchange. Most of the causes are in the habits of the individual.
It is not possible, by chemical or biological means (vaccinations)
to make a person disease-proof. This would represent an
invalidation of the laws of cause and effect.
Sometimes the injection of a poison into the blood stream results
in toleration of that poison, mistakenly labelled immunity.
Toleration is loss of vital resistance.
Environmental improvements, not vaccines, can eliminate epidemics.
Correct habits of living, and a clean internal environment do not
occasion the disease process."
Food for thought?
The conclusion of the last few articles is for you to decide whether
it is in harmony with nature or whether chemicals can bring us
health.
Until next week, take care of yourselves,
Elise