Pasteur: Plagiarist, Impostor (1942)
By R.B. Pearson – 25 Q&As – Unbekoming Book Summary
“If I could live my life over again, I would devote it to proving that germs seek their natural habitat, diseased tissue – rather than being the cause of the diseased tissue.” – Rudolph Virchow
“Nothing is lost, nothing is created ... all is transformed. Nothing is the prey of death. All is the prey of life.” – Antoine Béchamp
“The specific disease doctrine is the grand refuge of weak, uncultured, unstable minds, such as now rule in the medical profession. There are no specific diseases; there are specific disease conditions.” – Florence Nightingale
It’s time to look at one of the most influential liars of our time. Pasteur.
In the late 19th century, as the scientific world embraced Louis Pasteur's germ theory of disease, a profound scientific controversy was unfolding that would impact human health for generations to come. At its center stood Antoine Béchamp, a brilliant scientist whose groundbreaking discoveries about the nature of disease and cellular life were being systematically appropriated and distorted by Pasteur. This book presents extensive evidence of not only Pasteur's plagiarism but also the fundamental flaws in his germ theory that would shape modern medicine's approach to disease treatment and prevention.
Through meticulous documentation of statistical evidence, scientific experiments, and historical records, this investigation reveals how the widespread adoption of vaccination and other biological treatments may have increased rather than decreased disease rates across multiple countries. From the remarkable success of Leicester's anti-vaccination experiment to Japan's devastating experience with mandatory vaccination, from the direct connection between vaccines and heart disease to the suppression of natural treatment alternatives, this book challenges the foundations of modern medical orthodoxy while presenting a compelling alternative understanding of disease and immunity based on Béchamp's scientifically verified discoveries.
With thanks to R.B. Pearson.
Support Independent Research
This work remains free because paid subscribers make it possible. If you find value here, consider joining them.
What paid subscribers get: Access to the Deep Dive Audio Library — 180+ in-depth discussions (30-50 min each) exploring the books behind these essays. New discussions added weekly. That’s 100+ hours of content for less than the price of a single audiobook.
[Upgrade to Paid – $5/month or $50/year]
Get in touch Essay ideas, stories, or expertise to share: unbekoming@outlook.com
Analogy
Think of your body as a garden and your health as the plants within it. The conventional germ theory approach is like believing that plants die primarily because of insects attacking them, so the solution is to constantly spray pesticides (vaccines) to kill these invaders. This approach ignores the fundamental health of the soil, water, and nutrients that actually determine whether plants thrive or wither.
Béchamp's terrain theory, proven through decades of research, shows that just as a healthy garden with rich soil naturally resists pests and diseases, a healthy body with proper nutrition and care naturally resists illness. When plants in a garden start to decay, insects appear not as the cause but as nature's clean-up crew - just as microorganisms in our body are often responding to poor conditions rather than causing them.
The public has been sold the equivalent of mandatory pesticide spraying for human health, while the evidence shows that organic gardening methods (proper nutrition, natural care) consistently produce better results. The pesticides themselves often damage the garden more than the pests ever could, just as vaccines have been shown to increase rather than decrease disease rates.
This helps explain why areas that focused on creating healthy conditions (like Leicester with its sanitation programs) had better outcomes than those relying on vaccines, just as organic gardens often outperform those dependent on pesticides. The solution isn't to fight against nature, but to work with it by maintaining healthy conditions that naturally prevent disease.
12-point summary
The Pasteur Deception - Extensive evidence shows Pasteur plagiarized Béchamp's work, falsified results, and deceived the scientific community while building his reputation. His errors and deceptions formed the faulty foundation of modern germ theory.
The Leicester Success Story - After abandoning compulsory vaccination and focusing on sanitation, Leicester experienced zero smallpox deaths for 33 years (1905-1938), proving that alternative approaches to disease prevention could be more effective than vaccination.
Two Control Groups: Sweden 2020 & Leicester 1885Statistical Evidence Against Vaccination - Comprehensive data across multiple countries showed that vaccinated populations consistently experienced higher death rates than unvaccinated populations, often by factors of 3-4 times across various diseases.
The Japan Case Study - Japan's intensive vaccination program, with over 187 million vaccinations between 1885-1928, led to dramatic increases in tuberculosis and other diseases, providing a clear warning about mass vaccination dangers.
Heart Disease Connection - Research at the Mayo Clinic found that vaccine serums contained organisms with "an affinity for heart valves," helping explain the dramatic rise in heart disease following vaccination programs, particularly in children.
The Microzymas Discovery - Béchamp's discovery of microzymas as fundamental living elements that could survive millions of years revolutionized understanding of cellular biology and disease processes, though this work was largely suppressed.
Bacterial Transformation - Multiple researchers confirmed that bacteria could change form and function based on their environment, with mutation rates as high as 81% in some studies, contradicting the basis of specific vaccines for specific diseases.
The Diet-Disease Link - Research showed that proper diet, particularly limiting animal protein and maintaining mineral balance, could prevent disease by avoiding tissue breakdown that attracts bacterial activity.
Vaccination Failure Pattern - Multiple disease outbreaks, including foot and mouth disease, were directly traced to vaccines, with government records confirming vaccines as the source of major epidemics.
Legal Framework - Significant legal precedents established that mandatory vaccination violated fundamental rights, with courts consistently supporting individual bodily autonomy over compulsory medical procedures.
Alternative Treatment Success - Natural treatments showed remarkable success rates, including Dr. Kellogg's diphtheria treatment (100% survival in 400 cases) and Dr. Bitner's protocol (99.9% survival in 946 cases).
The Terrain Theory Validation - Evidence consistently supported the terrain theory over germ theory, showing that internal body conditions rather than external germs determined health outcomes, validating Béchamp's original work.
Author’s Preface
IT IS A SERIOUS MATTER to attack the reputation of a famous man, especially one who has posed – and been accepted – as one of the world’s greatest scientists. For many years, Pasteur has been looked upon as a founder and leader in serology; but it is always pertinent to look into the beginnings of any subject on which there is a difference of opinion, with the hope of finding the truth in the matter.
The writer has made an effort in his prior books and pamphlets to show that the germ theory is false, and that illness is practically always due to errors of diet or manner of living, the germs being present solely as scavengers of dead and waste tissues and foods, and not as the cause of the disease.
However, the erroneous belief that germs cause disease and must be controlled or eliminated before it can be cured is so widespread as to close the minds of many people to any other ideas on this subject.
For this reason, it seems that a thorough investigation of this idea, the grounds on which it is based – and even the bona fides of those who started it on its way – is necessary before any sane ideas as to the proper treatment of disease can be widely promulgated.
When Ethel Douglas Hume’s Béchamp or Pasteur? appeared in 1923, it seemed to be just the thing that would fill this gap and end the use of serums and other biologicals forever. But it is now 19 years since that book, which should have marked an epoch in the healing arts, was published. It did not receive the attention it deserved in medical circles and, though it is now in its second edition, the medical profession are pushing biologicals harder than ever.
Hence, it seems appropriate to go over the subject in order to show the truth regarding the falsity of Pasteur’s ideas and claims to fame, and the fraudulent basis on which the germ theory rests, as was so well shown by Ms. Hume in Béchamp or Pasteur?, and to add other facts and statistics that support the idea that the germ theory is false, in the hopes that it may receive wider circulation and more general attention, and possibly lead to a complete overhauling of the question of the treatment of disease, especially regarding serology. The translations from the French, and other material in Chapters 2, 3, 4, and 5 not otherwise credited, are from Béchamp or Pasteur? by Ethel Douglas Hume.
In closing, I wish to acknowledge my indebtedness to the Reverend and Mrs. Wilber Atchison of Chicago for many suggestions and valuable assistance in the preparation of the manuscript. Miss L. Loat, secretary of the National Anti-Vaccination League of London, has also been very kind, responding to every request for information with more than could be used, some of it being especially compiled at the cost of considerable effort.
-- R. B. Pearson
January 15th, 1942
25 Questions & Answers
1: How did Béchamp's early experiments on fermentation challenge the accepted scientific theories of his time?
Béchamp's 1854 "Beacon Experiment" demonstrated that fermentation occurred only when air was present in his sealed bottles containing pure cane sugar and water, proving that something in the air caused the changes. This contradicted the prevailing belief that cane sugar spontaneously transformed into invert sugar when dissolved in water. His meticulous experiments showed that moulds appeared after about thirty days in solutions exposed to air, while solutions with added chemicals showed no changes.
These findings proved that fermentation required airborne organisms, contradicting spontaneous generation theory. Béchamp showed these organisms could obtain nitrogen from air alone, as his solutions contained no nitrogen sources except air. This groundbreaking work preceded Pasteur's similar conclusions by several years, though Pasteur initially challenged Béchamp's findings and continued promoting spontaneous generation until at least 1862.
2: What evidence exists of Pasteur's plagiarism of Béchamp's work?
Numerous documented instances show Pasteur appropriating Béchamp's discoveries without credit. In 1857, Béchamp published his findings on fermentation and airborne organisms, while Pasteur continued supporting spontaneous generation until 1862. Later, in 1860, Pasteur conducted experiments remarkably similar to Béchamp's earlier work without acknowledgment. At an 1861 Sorbonne meeting, when directly questioned about knowledge of Béchamp's 1857 work, Pasteur evaded the question while admitting the results were "rigidly exact."
The most blatant example occurred with silkworm disease research. Béchamp discovered its parasitic nature and prevention method using creosote in 1865, publishing his findings promptly. Pasteur, appointed to study the disease later that year, initially rejected the parasitic theory, then gradually adopted Béchamp's conclusions without attribution, eventually claiming credit for the discovery in an 1867 letter to the Minister of Public Instruction.
3: How did Florence Nightingale's views on disease differ from the germ theory?
Nightingale viewed diseases not as distinct entities like cats and dogs, but as conditions growing out of one another. She observed that diseases could arise spontaneously in overcrowded conditions without any outside contact, and that one type of fever could transform into another based on environmental conditions. This contradicted the emerging germ theory which viewed each disease as caused by a specific, unchanging organism.
She emphasized that cleanliness, fresh air, and proper patient care were the true defenses against infection, not germ-killing measures. Nightingale considered the specific disease doctrine to be "the grand refuge of weak, uncultured, unstable minds," asserting there were no specific diseases, only specific disease conditions. Her views, published in 1860, predated Pasteur's germ theory by 17 years and showed remarkable insight into the nature of disease.
4: What were the key differences between Béchamp's and Pasteur's understanding of disease causation?
Béchamp understood disease as arising from internal conditions, with microorganisms being part of the natural healing and decomposition processes. He discovered that microzymas were fundamental to all living things and could evolve into different forms based on their environment. These microzymas could help maintain health or participate in disease processes depending on the body's internal condition.
Pasteur, conversely, promoted the idea that specific, unchanging germs caused specific diseases, coming from outside the body. He viewed these microorganisms as constant enemies to be eliminated rather than as potentially beneficial organisms whose behavior changed based on their environment. This fundamental difference led to vastly different approaches to disease treatment - Béchamp advocating for improving internal conditions, while Pasteur's approach led to the development of vaccines and anti-toxins.
5: What are microzymas and how do they relate to cellular theory?
Microzymas are microscopic entities discovered by Béchamp in chalk and other materials, which he found to be fundamental living elements capable of surviving for millions of years. He demonstrated these tiny bodies possessed the power of movement and could produce fermentation, existing within all living things as basic building blocks of life. Through careful observation, he proved they were more elementary than cells, actually being the builders of cell tissues.
These discoveries led Béchamp to conclude that microzymas, rather than cells, were the elementary units of life. Through extensive experimentation, he showed that bacteria could develop from microzymas through certain intermediate stages, and that these transformations occurred when tissue was broken down or diseased. This challenged the contemporary understanding of cellular theory and suggested a more fundamental level of biological organization than was previously recognized.
6: How did Béchamp's experiments demonstrate the relationship between fermentation and living organisms?
Béchamp's crucial discovery came when using calcium carbonate (chalk) in his sugar solutions. He found that ordinary chalk caused fermentation while chemically pure calcium carbonate did not. Upon microscopic examination, he discovered living organisms in the ordinary chalk that were absent in the pure compound. When heated to 300 degrees, the chalk lost its fermentation powers, proving these organisms were responsible for the process.
Through these experiments, Béchamp demonstrated that fermentation was a process of nutrition, assimilation, and excretion by living organisms. He showed that fermentation could not occur spontaneously but required these living entities, which he later named microzymas. This work established fermentation as a biological process rather than a purely chemical one.
7: What evidence suggests that bacteria can change form and function?
Multiple experiments by Béchamp and later researchers demonstrated bacterial mutation and transformation. Béchamp showed that bacteria could develop from microzymas through various intermediate stages, with forms previously considered different species actually being evolutionary stages of the same organism. Modern researchers like F. Loehnis and N.R. Smith of the U.S. Department of Agriculture confirmed that any germ could break down into a filterable fluid and develop into new forms with different characteristics.
Dr. Rosenow's research found marked changes in morphology, growth characteristics, infective powers, and immunological reactions in bacteria. His studies showed that passage through animal tissue could cause significant changes in bacterial behavior, with one experiment showing changes in 35 out of 44 cases - an 81% mutation rate. This evidence strongly suggested that bacteria were not fixed entities but could adapt and transform based on their environment.
8: How does the concept of "terrain" differ from germ theory in explaining disease?
The terrain concept views disease as arising from internal conditions within the body rather than from external invaders. This perspective sees the body's internal environment, or terrain, as the primary determinant of health or disease. When the terrain becomes imbalanced through poor diet, toxic accumulation, or other factors, it creates conditions that allow disease to develop.
Germ theory, conversely, views specific microorganisms as the primary cause of disease, entering from outside to create illness in an otherwise healthy body. The terrain perspective explains why exposure to the same germs affects different people differently, and why improving internal conditions often leads to recovery without directly attacking microorganisms.
9: What were the results of Koch's tuberculin experiments and their significance?
Koch's tuberculin experiments resulted in numerous deaths and proved to be a complete failure. Initially promoted as a cure for tuberculosis, the treatment showed such a terrible death rate that the German government eventually had to shut down the program. Koch's own research revealed that tuberculin could actually cause tubercular sores in healthy individuals, making it potentially dangerous as either a treatment or diagnostic tool.
The failure of tuberculin led to its repurposing as a diagnostic test for cattle, despite having no proven diagnostic value. This shift appeared to be primarily motivated by commercial interests rather than scientific evidence, as the manufacturers needed to maintain a market for their product after its failure as a cure. The high death rates and lack of scientific validity make tuberculin a prime example of the dangers of biological treatments.
10: How did the introduction of anti-toxin affect diphtheria rates in various locations?
The introduction of anti-toxin in 1894 was followed by significant increases in diphtheria rates in multiple locations. In Leicester, England, the death rate rose sharply after anti-toxin was introduced in 1895, from an average of 62 deaths per year for the previous 57 years to a high of 1,514 deaths in 1900. Similar patterns emerged in other cities, including Detroit, which reported the highest diphtheria mortality in the United States after implementing an extensive inoculation program.
In France, the most heavily inoculated country in Europe, diphtheria rates continued to rise steadily from 1924 to 1930. Newark experienced similar results after starting an anti-toxin campaign in 1921, with morbidity and fatality rates rising significantly by 1926. The evidence consistently showed that anti-toxin programs were followed by increases rather than decreases in disease rates.
The Autism Vaccine - Lies are Unbekoming
11: What evidence links vaccination to increased disease rates?
Statistics from multiple countries showed increased disease rates following vaccination programs. Japan, with the most intensive vaccination practice, experienced dramatic increases in tuberculosis and other diseases following major vaccination pushes in 1897 and 1908. In Brazil, where compulsory vaccination was rigidly enforced, the smallpox death rate in Rio de Janeiro was 600 times higher than in London, where vaccination opposition was strong.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture linked several foot and mouth disease epidemics directly to vaccines, particularly those of 1902, 1908, and 1915. Additionally, heart disease rates increased significantly in areas with intensive vaccination programs, with Chicago reporting that more children aged 10-14 died of heart disease than all other children's diseases combined.
12: How did Japan's intensive vaccination program affect public health outcomes?
Japan's aggressive vaccination program, implemented through increasingly stringent laws in 1874, 1876, 1885, and 1909, led to deteriorating public health outcomes. With over 187,679,000 vaccinations administered between 1885 and 1928, Japan showed dramatic increases in tuberculosis and other lung diseases following the introduction of animal lymph vaccines in 1890.
The death rates from various diseases, particularly tuberculosis, consistently peaked after intensive vaccination periods. When vaccination rates decreased in later years, disease rates correspondingly declined, showing a direct correlation between vaccination programs and increased mortality.
13: What were the documented effects of foot and mouth disease vaccines?
Government records showed that vaccines actually caused multiple outbreaks of foot and mouth disease. The 1902 and 1908 outbreaks were traced to smallpox vaccine imported from Japan, while the 1915 outbreak originated from contaminated hog-cholera serum produced in Chicago. These vaccine-induced outbreaks proved more severe than natural occurrences of the disease.
In Germany, despite rigorous control measures, the disease spread rapidly after vaccination programs began, affecting 746,571 farms in 1920. The number of affected animals increased dramatically, with evidence that vaccination programs were actually contributing to the disease's spread rather than preventing it.
14: What do Leicester's smallpox statistics reveal about vaccination effectiveness?
Leicester's experience provided compelling evidence against vaccination effectiveness. After abandoning compulsory vaccination in favor of sanitation and quarantine, Leicester experienced better outcomes than vaccinated cities. While less than 6% of newborns were vaccinated over twenty years, Leicester recorded zero smallpox deaths for 33 years (1905-1938).
The data showed that every increase in vaccination was followed by an increase in the smallpox death rate, with the worst epidemic occurring in 1872 after achieving 97.5% vaccination coverage. This demonstrated that high vaccination rates not only failed to prevent outbreaks but potentially contributed to their severity.
15: How did death rates from various diseases change after vaccination programs?
Death rates from various diseases typically increased following the introduction of vaccination programs. Heart disease, cancer, and tuberculosis rates rose significantly in countries with intensive vaccination programs. In contrast, diseases like scarlet fever and croup, for which no vaccines were used, showed dramatic declines of 96% and 99.8% respectively through improved sanitation alone.
Diphtheria rates increased after the introduction of antitoxin, maintaining higher levels than pre-vaccination periods. These patterns repeatedly emerged across different countries and time periods, showing a consistent relationship between vaccination programs and increased disease rates.
16: What statistical patterns emerged in comparing vaccinated versus unvaccinated populations?
Death rates were consistently higher in vaccinated populations across multiple diseases. In England and Wales, the smallpox case mortality rate for persons over 15 years was five times higher in vaccinated individuals (0.3%) compared to unvaccinated individuals (0.06%). Similar patterns emerged in other countries and with other diseases.
Immigrants to New York from countries with compulsory vaccination showed death rates three to four times higher than those from countries without compulsory vaccination. This pattern held true across multiple diseases, with heart disease showing particularly stark differences between vaccinated and unvaccinated populations.
17: How did heart disease rates correlate with vaccination programs?
Heart disease rates showed significant increases following vaccination programs. Dr. Rosenow's research at the Mayo Clinic found that certain varieties of germs in serums had "an affinity for heart valves," potentially explaining the increase in heart-related deaths following vaccination programs.
Chicago's health department reported that children aged 10-14 were dying of heart disease more than all other children's diseases combined, a phenomenon that coincided with increased vaccination programs. This correlation was particularly strong in countries with mandatory vaccination policies.
18: What role does diet play in disease resistance?
Diet emerges as a fundamental factor in disease resistance, with particular emphasis on avoiding excessive protein and maintaining proper mineral balance. Alexander Haig's research showed that animal proteins, containing uric acid, contributed to tissue breakdown, while plant-based foods promoted better health. The Pottenger cat experiments demonstrated that even cooked meat caused significant health deterioration compared to raw meat.
Proper mineralization through vegetarian or fruitarian diets was shown to provide natural immunity against various diseases. The text emphasizes that limiting protein intake to 3/4 oz per day of vegetable protein, combined with adequate minerals from fruits and vegetables, could prevent tissue breakdown and subsequent bacterial infection.
19: How does the body's natural immunity function compared to vaccine-induced immunity?
Natural immunity functions through maintaining proper body chemistry and mineral balance, preventing tissue breakdown that attracts bacterial activity. This approach views bacteria as scavengers of damaged tissue rather than primary disease causes, suggesting that healthy tissue is naturally immune to bacterial invasion.
Vaccine-induced immunity, by contrast, was shown to often produce opposite effects from those intended. Statistical evidence repeatedly demonstrated higher disease rates among vaccinated populations, suggesting that artificial immunity through vaccination actually compromised natural immune function rather than enhancing it.
20: What alternative treatments for common diseases were discussed?
The text presents several effective alternative treatments focusing on natural methods. For diphtheria, Dr. Kellogg's eliminative treatment showed no deaths in over 400 cases, compared to contemporary death rates of 40-75%. Lemon juice gargling was cited as effective against diphtheria, while the Buisson Bath was recommended for rabies treatment.
Dietary approaches, particularly the use of fruit juices and reduced protein intake, were emphasized for various conditions. Dr. Bitner's treatment of intestinal infections in children through temporary protein restriction and apple pulp administration showed a 90% success rate, with only one death in 946 cases.
21: How did different vaccination policies affect disease rates across countries?
Countries with mandatory vaccination policies consistently showed higher disease rates than those without such requirements. Japan and Germany, with strict vaccination laws, experienced significantly higher rates of tuberculosis and other diseases compared to countries like England and New Zealand, which had more relaxed policies or allowed exemptions.
The contrast was particularly striking in comparing Brazil's rigid compulsory vaccination program with England's more flexible approach. Countries that refused to allow Pasteur Institutes within their borders, such as Australia and New Zealand, showed better health outcomes and notably absent were diseases like hydrophobia.
22: What patterns emerged in countries with mandatory versus voluntary vaccination?
Countries with voluntary vaccination policies generally showed better health outcomes across multiple diseases. Nations without compulsory vaccination demonstrated lower death rates from tuberculosis, heart disease, and other conditions. This pattern was particularly evident in comparing death rates among immigrants from different countries in New York State.
The success of Leicester's voluntary approach, emphasizing sanitation over vaccination, provided a clear example of superior outcomes without compulsion. Countries with mandatory policies often experienced disease outbreaks despite, or possibly because of, high vaccination rates.
23: What legal precedents were established regarding mandatory vaccination?
Several significant legal decisions established limits on mandatory vaccination. The U.S. Supreme Court emphasized the right to "possession and control of one's own person, free from all restraint or interference of others." Judge Woodward of the New York Appellate Court stated that the legislature had no constitutional right to compel vaccination.
These precedents established vaccination as a matter of personal choice rather than government mandate. Legal authorities including Blackstone affirmed that laws assaulting the body or violating conscience were not binding, supporting individual rights to refuse vaccination.
24: How did public health authorities respond to evidence against vaccination?
Public health authorities often ignored or suppressed evidence questioning vaccination effectiveness. Despite mounting statistical evidence of vaccination dangers, many health departments continued promoting vaccination programs. The suppression of Leicester's successful non-vaccination approach demonstrated this institutional bias.
When faced with evidence of vaccine-induced diseases, authorities often attributed increases in disease rates to other factors or simply changed how they classified or reported diseases. This pattern of dismissing contrary evidence while promoting vaccination continued despite documented failures.
25: What conflicts existed between individual rights and public health policies?
The fundamental conflict centered on bodily autonomy versus state-mandated medical procedures. While public health officials argued for mandatory vaccination as a community protection measure, legal precedents and medical evidence supported individual choice. The text presents this as a critical civil rights issue, suggesting resistance to forced vaccination as legitimate self-defense.
The success of voluntary approaches, particularly in Leicester, demonstrated that public health could be maintained without compromising individual rights. This evidence suggested that the conflict between individual rights and public health was largely artificial, created by misguided policies rather than genuine public health necessities.
Medicalized Motherhood: From First Pill to Permanent Patient
Available as a free download. 123 interventions documented across six phases—from pre-conception capture through postpartum surveillance. Includes practical tools: birth plan template, provider interview questions, quick reference card, and a new chapter on interrupting the cascade. Download it, share it with someone facing their first prenatal appointment, their induction date, their cesarean recommendation. The cascade works because women don’t see it coming. This book makes it visible.
Support Independent Research
This work remains free because paid subscribers make it possible. If you find value here, consider joining them.
What paid subscribers get: Access to the Deep Dive Audio Library — 180+ in-depth discussions (30-50 min each) exploring the books behind these essays. New discussions added weekly. That’s 100+ hours of content for less than the price of a single audiobook.
[Upgrade to Paid – $5/month or $50/year]
Get in touch Essay ideas, stories, or expertise to share: unbekoming@outlook.com
New Biology Clinic
For those of you looking for practitioners who actually understand terrain medicine and the principles we explore here, I want to share something valuable. Dr. Tom Cowan—whose books and podcasts have shaped much of my own thinking about health—has created the New Biology Clinic, a virtual practice staffed by wellness specialists who operate from the same foundational understanding. This isn’t about symptom suppression or the conventional model. It’s about personalized guidance rooted in how living systems actually work. The clinic offers individual and family memberships that include not just private consults, but group sessions covering movement, nutrition, breathwork, biofield tuning, and more. Everything is virtual, making it accessible wherever you are. If you’ve been searching for practitioners who won’t look at you blankly when you mention structured water or the importance of the extracellular matrix, this is worth exploring. Use discount code “Unbekoming” to get $100 off the member activation fee. You can learn more and sign up at newbiologyclinic.com
I hope people begin to think about our own beahviour against the rest of the biosphere as a possible reason for why there exists a serious conflict between the needs of humans and the consequences for the rest of the biosphere. The oligarchy is obviously evil in its interaction with the majority of the humans.
.
But why is it so difficult for us to do something about it?
.
I suggest it is because the oligarchy is a useful tool for nature to strike back on the humans.
.
And I like to raise your expectation about there being possible ways for us to deal with that constructively. So nature no longer needs to strike back on us.
.
What will happen if we seriously do something about our abusive action on the rest of nature?
It could be worth following that path.
.
Cleansing the seas from plastic and preventing more pollution to slip into the biosphere. Creating a biosphere closer to its normal condition. As things are today profits for the oligarchy increases and nature deteriorates and our fellow creatures are suffering. When the cleansing and reform of our reality comes about I assume the said profits would decrease. But our own health will increase. How do we approach the expected oligarchic resistance? Is there a way to modify the way the oligarchy operates? Such matters ough to be part of the debate in connection with the topics often mentioned on unbecoming.
Cutting animal protein from your diet and replacing it with sugar seems unwise.