The Convergence: Five Independent Cases Against Vaccination, 1870–1920

An Essay on How Unconnected Thinkers Using Different Methods Exposed the Same Institutional Failure

In 2021, Pfizer eliminated its placebo control group by offering the vaccine to all trial participants, making long-term comparative safety data permanently unobtainable.¹ The company described this as an ethical obligation. Critics called it the destruction of the control group. The debate was treated as novel.

It was not novel. It was a repetition — the latest iteration of a structural pattern first documented, in detail, over a century ago by people who had no knowledge of one another, no shared methodology, and in several cases no shared continent. Between 1870 and 1920, a naturalist, a homeopath, a physician, a world traveller, and a civic investigator independently dismantled the case for compulsory vaccination. They did so from within their own disciplines, using their own tools, arriving at conclusions that converged on the same set of problems: manipulated statistics, concealed injuries, destroyed controls, credential-based suppression of dissent, and the structural impossibility of honest safety assessment within a system that punished honest reporting.

None of them cited each other’s early work. Several never met. The convergence of their findings constitutes a form of evidence that is, in some respects, stronger than any single study — because independent replication from unrelated starting points is precisely what the scientific method is supposed to value.

---

Support Independent Investigative Journalism and Research

This work remains free because paid subscribers make it possible. If you find value here, consider joining them.

What paid subscribers get: 1-2 free books per month. e.g. The PSA Trap, Breast Cancer, Chlorine Dioxide, and Drilling for Profit.

Plus: Access to the Deep Dive Audio Library — 180+ in-depth discussions (30-50 min each) exploring the books behind these essays. New discussions regularly added. That’s 100+ hours of content for less than the price of a single audiobook.

[Upgrade to Paid – $5/month or $50/year AUD]

unbekoming@outlook.com

---

Two quick things please.

Unbekoming is featured on Sidestack this week for Substack of the Week. If you have a moment, please head over and give me an upvote: https://sidestack.io/week

I’ve also been relisted on the Reality of Illness site, and an upvote there would be much appreciated too.

That’s it. Thank you.

---

I. The Numbers That Moved

Alfred Russel Wallace — co-discoverer of the theory of natural selection, Fellow of the Royal Society, holder of honorary doctorates from Dublin and Oxford — did not begin as a vaccination critic. He began as a statistician who noticed that the official figures did not survive contact with the official records.

In 1898, Wallace published Vaccination a Delusion, built almost entirely from data presented to the Royal Commission on Vaccination, the British government’s own inquiry. His method was straightforward: he took the Commission’s own numbers and made the comparisons the Commissioners had failed to make.

The results were damning. The National Vaccine Establishment, staffed by the President and four Censors of the Royal College of Physicians and the Master and two senior Wardens of the College of Surgeons, had published successive annual reports stating that pre-vaccination smallpox deaths in London were “about 2,000 annually” (1812 and 1818), then “about 4,000” (1826 and 1834), then “exceeded 5,000” (1836), then “4,000 lives saved” (1839).² The actual figure, recorded in the Bills of Mortality and available to anyone who looked, never reached 4,000 in any single year of the eighteenth century.³

Wallace did not attribute this to conspiracy. He attributed it to something more durable: institutional carelessness that always erred in one direction. “We cannot possibly suppose that they knew or believed that they were publishing untruths,” he wrote. “We must, therefore, fall back upon the supposition that they were careless to such an extent as not to find out that they were authorizing successive statements of the same quantity as inconsistent with each other as 2,000 and 5,000.”⁴

The pattern did not stop with the Vaccine Establishment. Dr. W. B. Carpenter, one of Britain’s leading physiologists, claimed in the Spectator in 1881 that pre-vaccination London smallpox mortality in six months often exceeded the current mortality of all twenty million people in England and Wales in a full year. The actual records show London smallpox mortality peaked at 3,992 in 1772, while in 1871 — well into the vaccination era — it reached 7,912, more than double. Carpenter privately acknowledged the error. He never corrected it publicly.⁵

Ernest Hart, editor of the British Medical Journal, stated that the average annual smallpox mortality of London in certain eighteenth-century decades was about 18,000 per million living. The actual figure was a little over 2,000. He had multiplied the real number by six. This was not a misprint — he devoted an entire page to elaborating on this figure and comparing it triumphantly with modern rates. The statement was quietly removed from later editions.⁶

Wallace’s critical insight was not that individual errors existed but that they formed a system. Every error inflated the pre-vaccination death toll or minimised the post-vaccination one. Not a single official misstatement, in a century of record-keeping, understated vaccination’s benefits. The errors were not random. They were directional.

He then performed the comparison the Royal Commission never made: he plotted smallpox mortality alongside mortality from other zymotic diseases (measles, scarlet fever, whooping cough, diphtheria) and total mortality over the same period. The correspondence was striking. Smallpox rose and fell in lockstep with the other zymotics, all responding to the same underlying variable — sanitary conditions — and none showing any independent effect attributable to vaccination.⁷

The case of Leicester made this visible on a civic scale. After the severe epidemic of 1872, the town progressively rejected vaccination. By the 1890s, less than 5% of births were vaccinated. On the theory of the vaccinators, Leicester should have been devastated. In fact, from 1878 to 1889 — twelve consecutive years — the town recorded a total of eleven smallpox deaths. During the same period, the thoroughly revaccinated British Army and Navy showed a smallpox death rate more than double that of almost-unvaccinated Leicester.⁸

Wallace laid out these comparisons using the Commission’s own data, from the Commission’s own reports, making calculations the Commissioners never made. His conclusion was not that the Commission was corrupt. It was that they were incapable — that they had been given the answer key and could not read it, because they never performed the one operation that would have revealed the truth: comparison with an appropriate baseline.

---

II. The Bodies in the Consulting Room

While Wallace worked with national statistics in England, J. Compton Burnett worked with individual patients in London. Burnett was a conventionally trained physician (M.D.) who practised homeopathy, and he was not opposed to vaccination. “The writer is himself in the habit of vaccinating his patients,” he stated in his preface to Vaccinosis and Its Cure by Thuja, first published in 1884. “He believes that vaccination does protect, to a certain large extent, from small-pox.”⁹

Burnett’s contribution was not political or statistical. It was clinical. He identified a disease state that had no name and no place in the medical literature — a chronic constitutional disturbance caused by vaccination itself, which he termed “vaccinosis.” His starting point was a logical observation so simple it is difficult to argue with: a person who is vaccinated and thereby rendered immune to smallpox has, by definition, been moved from a state of perfect health to a state of something other than perfect health. “Any modification or altering of perfect health must result in a minus,” he wrote, “and less than perfect health must necessarily be disease or ill health of some sort and in some degree.”¹⁰

The protective power of vaccination, on its own terms, was a diseased state.

Burnett documented case after case of chronic illness following vaccination — neuralgia, skin eruptions, paresis, digestive disorders — that responded specifically to the homeopathic remedy Thuja Occidentalis. His most striking observation concerned so-called “unsuccessful” vaccinations — cases where the vaccination did not “take,” producing no visible pustule. Conventional medicine held that these patients had been unaffected. Burnett’s clinical experience told him the opposite: “Not a few persons date their ill health from a so-called unsuccessful vaccination.” His explanation was that when the body did not react locally, the “virus” was absorbed systemically, producing chronic rather than acute disease.¹¹

One of Burnett’s early cases involved a ten-week-old baby in Harley Street who appeared to be dying. The child’s wet nurse had been revaccinated the day before being hired. Burnett concluded the infant was absorbing the vaccinial poison through the nurse’s milk. He administered Thuja to both baby and nurse. The baby recovered; the nurse’s vaccinial vesicles — which should have progressed to pustules — withered and dried up instead.¹²

Burnett was scrupulous about the limits of his evidence. “It is not possible to prove, of course, that this apparently dying baby was suffering from vaccinosis,” he wrote. But he noted the established facts — the nurse had been revaccinated, she was suckling the baby, the baby was desperately ill, it received Thuja and improved, and simultaneously the nurse’s vaccination vesicles withered — and asked what else could explain the convergent observations.¹³

An American physician, Dr. J. T. Harris of Boston, independently documented a case in 1882 where a nursing mother was vaccinated and her seven-month-old breastfeeding infant subsequently developed a full vaccinia eruption — between four and five hundred vesicles — diagnosed by multiple physicians as vaccination transmitted through the milk.¹⁴

What Burnett established, from the consulting room rather than the statistical table, was that vaccination produced a spectrum of injury far wider than the profession acknowledged, because the profession was not looking for it. He was identifying a category of harm that was invisible to a medical system that did not believe it existed.

---

III. The Dead Children and the Missing Records

Across the Atlantic, working with death certificates, court records, government reports, and the testimony of bereaved parents, Charles M. Higgins was building a documentary case of a different kind.

Higgins was not a physician. He was a Brooklyn businessman, a civic activist, and by his own account he spent a lifetime and a fortune investigating vaccination. His method was the method of the investigative journalist and the litigator: he collected primary documents, cross-referenced official records, and confronted institutions with their own paperwork.

In 1920, he published Horrors of Vaccination Exposed and Illustrated, a petition addressed to President Woodrow Wilson. The document is sprawling and sometimes repetitive, but its evidentiary core is difficult to dismiss, because it consists almost entirely of official records.

Higgins had in his possession death certificates showing vaccination as a direct or contributing cause of death. One recorded the death of a one-year-old child, three days after vaccination, from “vaccinal septicemia.”¹⁵ He documented the death of a woman hospital nurse six months after vaccination, from multiple abscesses that broke out across her body in successive crops.¹⁶ He had an English certificate showing a man dead from vaccination-induced abscesses that persisted for seven years.¹⁷ Another English certificate recorded an infant dead from vaccinal septicemia in thirty-four hours.¹⁸

These were not allegations. They were what death certificates said.

Higgins identified five children of primary school age, all killed in a single week in September 1915, from vaccination resulting in lockjaw and septicemia.¹⁹ He cited the memorial pamphlet written by James A. Loyster, a New York editor and manufacturer, documenting the deaths of approximately thirty children from vaccination in New York State in 1914 — the result of a mass vaccination campaign forced upon school children by the Department of Education. In that same year, three people died of smallpox in the entire state.²⁰

Thirty children killed by the remedy. Three by the disease.

Higgins’s most structurally important contribution was his documentation of how these deaths were concealed. He demonstrated that vaccinators routinely recorded the terminal disease — lockjaw, pneumonia, meningitis — as the sole cause of death, omitting vaccination as the primary or contributing cause. This was not inference. He had the certificates showing both practices side by side: some doctors honestly recorded vaccination as a cause, others recorded only the secondary infection.²¹

The structural problem was clear: the people responsible for administering vaccination were also the people who filled out death certificates when vaccination killed. The system had no external audit. Higgins quoted Henry May, a Medical Officer of Health, who had candidly explained the practice: “In certificates given by us voluntarily, and to which the public have access, it is scarcely to be expected that a medical man will give opinions which may tell against or reflect upon himself in any way.” May acknowledged that a child in his own practice had died from vaccination, but “in my desire to preserve vaccination from reproach, I omitted all mention of it from my certificate of death.”²²

This was not a whistleblower’s revelation obtained through subterfuge. It was published in the Birmingham Medical Review. The concealment was openly described, in a professional journal, as a reasonable professional practice.

Higgins also traced the chain of evidence connecting vaccine “virus” from two major American manufacturers — the H. K. Mulford Company and Parke, Davis & Co. — to two devastating epidemics of Foot and Mouth Disease in the United States in 1902 and 1908. The Bureau of Animal Industry’s own report, released in 1909, confirmed that contaminated vaccine “virus” of Japanese origin had caused the 1908 epidemic and probably the 1902 one. The 1908 outbreak led to the slaughter of 3,636 animals at a cost of $300,000 to the government. A subsequent epidemic from 1914 to 1916, which Higgins connected to the same source chain, destroyed 172,222 animals across twenty-three states at a cost exceeding nine million dollars.²³ No recompense was made.

Ninety-nine companies were then licensed by the U.S. government to manufacture vaccines and serums, with combined capitalisation exceeding fifty million dollars. This commercial infrastructure, combined with the major medical societies, formed what Higgins described as “a most gigantic medical, political and commercial interest behind the medical evil of compulsory vaccination.”²⁴ He documented the structure with membership rolls and capitalisation figures — not as assertion but as disclosed financial fact.

---

IV. The View From Forty Countries

J. M. Peebles brought something none of the others could: ground truth from across the world. A physician, author, and former American consul in Turkey under President Grant, Peebles had spent thirty years investigating vaccination in dozens of countries — Trebizonde, South Africa, New Zealand, Australia, British India, Ceylon, Egypt, China, across Europe, Mexico, and the Pacific Islands.²⁵

His 1900 book Vaccination a Curse and a Menace to Personal Liberty is at times polemical in ways that date badly. But embedded in the polemic is a body of comparative observation that no desk-bound analyst could have assembled. Peebles had seen vaccination administered in radically different conditions — arm-to-arm in tropical countries, with bovine lymph in temperate ones — and he had observed what happened.

In tropical countries, where arm-to-arm vaccination was the primary method, Peebles documented the spread of syphilis and leprosy through the vaccination chain. “This mode has spread syphilis and leprosy among the native inhabitants,” he wrote, “until the indigenous populations of the Sandwich Islands and the British West Indies are threatened with extinction.”²⁶

In Australia, Peebles observed the alternative. New South Wales had a very small percentage of vaccinated persons, and smallpox had been effectively controlled through isolation and sanitation. Sir Richard Thorne, testifying before the Royal Commission, confirmed the pattern: “The evidence is so abundant that I could keep you for hours in telling of cases in which epidemics have evidently been prevented by cleanliness and the isolation of the first cases.”²⁷

In Switzerland, the effects of vaccination had caused sufficient public outrage to overthrow the compulsory system entirely. Peebles documented the case of John Pfaender, a Swiss child born healthy in September 1875, vaccinated by the official vaccinator in June 1876. Eight days later his feet swelled, abscesses formed, his teeth rotted, his glands swelled, and fistulous sores appeared on his hands and feet. By 1882, several bones of his hands had rotted away. He could neither walk nor stand.²⁸

Since Switzerland rejected compulsory vaccination, Peebles noted, its general death rate had become the lowest in Europe.²⁹

Peebles also documented vaccination practices at Castle Garden, the American immigrant processing station, where a government surgeon vaccinated 276 immigrants in a single day without once cleaning his lancet. When asked whether he feared inoculating disease or whether he examined patients before vaccinating, the surgeon replied that “he could not stop for that, besides no choice in the matter was left with him.”³⁰

The value of Peebles’s contribution is not analytical sophistication — he lacked Wallace’s statistical precision and Burnett’s clinical rigour. It is observational breadth. He could compare outcomes across sanitary regimes, climate zones, vaccination methods, and enforcement levels because he had personally visited the places in question. His comparative evidence showed that wherever sanitation improved, smallpox declined — with or without vaccination — and wherever vaccination was most rigorously enforced without sanitation, the results were worst.

---

V. The European Medical Authorities

The earliest of the convergent voices was Dr. Schieferdecker, who published Horrors of Vaccination in 1870 — nearly three decades before Wallace’s statistical analysis and half a century before Higgins’s documentary investigation. Schieferdecker compiled testimony from across the European medical establishment: physicians, professors, statisticians, and public health officials who had concluded, from within the profession, that vaccination was failing on its own terms.

His method was accumulation. He gathered statements from named, credentialed physicians across Germany, France, England, and Austria — not anonymous dissenters but holders of chairs and directorships — documenting their observations that vaccination did not prevent smallpox, that it transmitted syphilis and other blood diseases, and that vaccinated populations showed no advantage over unvaccinated ones.³¹

Alexander von Humboldt, he reported, had written to the President of the Anti-Vaccine League in London “that he had clearly perceived the progressive, dangerous influence of vaccine in France, England, and Germany.”³² Marc D’Espine showed in Echo Medical in 1859 that of those attacked by smallpox, 65% were vaccinated and only 23% unvaccinated.³³ Professor Ennemoser wrote that vaccination was “a more infernal mystification” than the world had ever experienced, comparing it to the belief in witchcraft.³⁴

Schieferdecker documented a pattern that would reappear in every subsequent decade: the military data. In every country he examined, the number of men unfit for military service had constantly increased over the preceding thirty years — a period coextensive with expanding compulsory vaccination.³⁵ Dr. Czoernig, Director of the Statistical Bureau in Vienna, confirmed the same fact for Austria.³⁶

The contribution of Schieferdecker’s compilation is not originality but authentication. These were not fringe voices. They were chairs of medicine, directors of statistical bureaux, military surgeons, and hospital physicians who had reached conclusions their institutions did not want to hear.

---

VI. What Convergence Reveals

Five men. A naturalist-statistician in England. A homeopathic physician in London. A civic investigator in Brooklyn. A globe-travelling physician-diplomat. A compiler of European medical testimony. No shared methodology. No coordinated effort. No common ideology — Burnett was a practising vaccinator, Wallace was a socialist-scientist, Higgins was a constitutional-rights activist, Peebles was a spiritualist, and Schieferdecker was a compiler of mainstream European medical opinion.

They found the same things.

They found that official statistics were systematically inflated in favour of vaccination — not through conspiracy but through institutional bias that never erred in the other direction. Wallace demonstrated this with the Royal Commission’s own figures. Schieferdecker documented it across European governments. Higgins proved it with American death certificates.

They found that vaccination injuries were concealed by the structural fact that the people who administered the vaccine were the people who recorded the outcomes. Wallace quoted the British Medical Officer who omitted vaccination from his death certificate “to preserve vaccination from reproach.” Higgins collected American death certificates showing the same practice. Burnett identified an entire category of chronic disease — vaccinosis — that was invisible precisely because the medical system did not believe it existed and therefore never looked for it.

They found that compulsory vaccination eliminated the possibility of honest comparison. Wallace pointed out that universal vaccination destroyed the control group — with no unvaccinated population, no true test of efficacy was possible. The town of Leicester, which had voluntarily rejected vaccination, became a natural experiment that the medical establishment had not designed and could not explain away. Its results contradicted the official position completely.

They found that commercial and professional interests made honest assessment structurally impossible. Higgins documented ninety-nine licensed vaccine manufacturers and the membership rolls of the medical societies that supported compulsory laws. Peebles observed the same commercial dynamics across three continents. The system that assessed vaccination’s safety was funded by vaccination’s continuation.

They found that the comparison the authorities never made — vaccination mortality versus smallpox mortality in the same population in the same year — consistently showed the remedy killing more than the disease. Higgins documented thirty children dead from vaccination in New York in 1914 against three from smallpox. Wallace showed the revaccinated British Army performing worse than unvaccinated Leicester. Schieferdecker compiled European data showing the same pattern.

Each man saw elements the others missed. Wallace saw the statistical architecture of deception. Burnett saw the clinical reality of chronic vaccine injury. Higgins saw the documentary trail of concealed deaths. Peebles saw the global pattern across sanitary regimes. Schieferdecker saw the European medical establishment’s internal dissent. Together, they constitute a triangulated body of evidence that no single critic, however brilliant, could have assembled alone.

---

VII. The Structural Recurrence

The specific mechanisms these men documented — directional statistical error, concealment of injury by those who inflicted it, destruction of control groups, commercial capture of regulatory process, credential-based dismissal of critics, and the conflation of temporal correlation with causation by the establishment rather than its critics — did not disappear with the smallpox vaccine.

They are structural features of any system in which a compulsory medical intervention is administered by the same profession that assesses its safety, promoted by the same industry that profits from its sale, and enforced by a state that has already committed to its necessity.

Wallace identified the core problem in 1898: “In no other case should we allow interested persons to decide an important matter. Whether iron ships are safer than wooden ones is not decided by ironmasters or by shipbuilders, but by the experience of sailors and by the statistics of loss.”³⁷

The documents these men left behind are publicly available. The statistics they cited are drawn from official records. The death certificates Higgins collected were government instruments. The Royal Commission data Wallace analysed was published by Parliament. The Registrar-General’s reports are in the British archives. The U.S. Bureau of Animal Industry reports are in the federal record.

The evidence was never hidden. It was ignored — which is a different problem, and in some respects a harder one.

These five men, working alone, saw clearly what the institutions around them could not afford to see. Their convergence across disciplines, methodologies, continents, and decades is not proof that they were right about every claim. Some of their specific arguments have not aged well; some of their science was wrong by modern standards. But the structural patterns they identified — the mechanisms by which a medical establishment protects a profitable practice from honest scrutiny — have proven remarkably durable.

The package insert lists the side effects. Most patients never see it. The doctor doesn’t offer it, the pharmacist doesn’t mention it. But it exists, and it says what it says.

The documents exist, and they say what they say. They said it a century ago. The question is not whether the evidence was available. The question is what kind of system makes the same evidence invisible, generation after generation, and calls that invisibility consensus.

---

References

1. Thomas, S.J., et al. “Safety and Efficacy of the BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine through 6 Months.” New England Journal of Medicine, 385, 2021. The unblinding and vaccination of the placebo group is described in the supplementary materials.

2. Wallace, A.R. Vaccination a Delusion: Its Penal Enforcement a Crime. London: Swan Sonnenschein, 1898. Chapter I, “Vaccination and the Medical Profession.”

3. Ibid. The actual deaths from smallpox are given in the Second Report of the Royal Commission, p. 290.

4. Ibid.

5. Ibid., pp. 15–16.

6. Ibid., p. 16. “This great authority, therefore, has multiplied the real number by six.”

7. Ibid., Chapter VI, Summary and Conclusion, discussion of Diagram I.

8. Ibid., Chapter IV, “Two Great Experiments,” discussion of Leicester and the Army and Navy, pp. 54–65.

9. Burnett, J.C. Vaccinosis and Its Cure by Thuja; with Remarks on Homoeoprophylaxis. London: The Homoeopathic Publishing Company, 2nd ed., 1897. Preface to the First Edition.

10. Ibid., pp. 8–9.

11. Ibid., pp. 14–16. “Not a few persons date their ill health from a so-called unsuccessful vaccination.”

12. Ibid., pp. 18–21, “A Severe Case — A Dying Baby.”

13. Ibid., pp. 21–22.

14. Harris, J.T. “A Case of true Vaccinia in a Child following the vaccination of her Mother.” New England Medical Gazette, June 1883. Reproduced in Burnett, Vaccinosis, pp. 23–29.

15. Higgins, C.M. Horrors of Vaccination Exposed and Illustrated. Brooklyn: published by the author, 1920, p. 9.

16. Ibid., pp. 9–10.

17. Ibid., p. 10.

18. Ibid.

19. Ibid., p. 10.

20. Ibid., pp. 10, 145–163. See also the Loyster pamphlet, “Vaccination Results in New York State in 1914.”

21. Ibid., pp. 8–9, discussion of death certificate falsification.

22. Wallace, Vaccination a Delusion, pp. 18–19, quoting Henry May, Medical Officer of Health, in Birmingham Medical Review, Vol. III, pp. 34–35. Also cited in Higgins, Horrors of Vaccination.

23. Higgins, Horrors of Vaccination, pp. 95–102. Citing U.S. Bureau of Animal Industry reports for 1902, 1908, and 1909, and the Year Book of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1914, p. 21.

24. Ibid., pp. 61–62.

25. Peebles, J.M. Vaccination a Curse and a Menace to Personal Liberty. Battle Creek, MI: Temple of Health Publishing, 1900. Preface.

26. Ibid.

27. Ibid., p. 113, quoting Sir Richard Thorne’s testimony before the Royal Commission.

28. Ibid., p. 113, case of John Pfaender.

29. Ibid.

30. Ibid., p. 141, quoting G.H. Merkel, M.D., in Massachusetts Eclectic Medical Journal, November 1882.

31. Schieferdecker, Dr. Horrors of Vaccination. New York, 1870. Held at Yale Medical Library (Harvey Cushing / John Hay Whitney Medical Library).

32. Ibid., citing Alexander von Humboldt’s letter to Mr. Gibbs, President of the Anti-Vaccine League, London.

33. Ibid., citing Marc D’Espine, Echo Medical, July 1859.

34. Ibid., citing Professor Ennemoser.

35. Ibid., pp. 33–35.

36. Ibid., citing Dr. Czoernig, Director of the Statistical Bureau, Vienna.

37. Wallace, Vaccination a Delusion, Chapter I, p. 13.

---

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