Tuesday, January 5, 2021

Antoine Béchamp & Terrain Theory: Pasteur Plagiarizes and Promotes A Poor But Profitable Theory That Has Likely Sickened Us All (The Planet Too)

Germs seek their natural habitat – diseased tissue – rather than being the cause of diseased tissue.” - Antoine Béchamp

I’m going out on a limb here to explain my theory about viral spread.  I’ve given it much thought. While claiming no special science knowledge. Other then a constant life time of learning.  Always reading books. Consuming information. Then going one step further and thinking about that information. Not accepting it all at face value, but, actually considering how or if  the information fits together with what has been already learned. What seems sensible. And how it all fits into the world at large. Because, yes, that has to be considered.
 So, I spend as much time as as possible outdoors. Walking. Foraging. Herb gathering. And gardening!  It’s where we should all spend more time because it keeps us grounded in the real. The time outside/in nature/interacting with plants and animals helps me to understand that yes, I am very much a part of this planet. And I do function in tandem with this planet- It's a symbiosis. (Symbiosis is any type of a close and long-term biological interaction ) This includes our symbiotic relationship with germs and bacteria.

 A little background out of the way let's delve a bit into an idea that's been rolling around in my brain for a bit now.  I’ve long felt that there was another mechanism to viral spread.. The spread that occurs unimpeded by masks and social distancing. Because if you pay attention you should understand by now... masks and social distancing haven’t made a bit of difference. And they've never been shown too in the past. Just like now. I’ll set aside the extremely problematic PCR test for this post. And just talk of the spread of viruses and bacteria. My suspicion is the connection is done through the microbiota of people and the planet and everything that lives on it.  Covid, like any other virus, infects the weak. That includes our less then healthy planet and it’s inhabitants. Somehow the microbiome is the source and our microbiota is the mechanism. I've not shored this up, but, think it's related to terrain theory. Which I came across after pondering the virus/ covid situation for some time. Terrain Theory looks to be more based in reality then the drivel that has been foisted upon us for far too long!

And yes, there will be more reading about this subject as I am awaiting the arrival of two new books- Listed at the end of this report
wired.com (excerpted)

I’m going to leave wired’s propagandistic terminology out of this report- no name calling

" Béchamp  argued that microbes became dangerous when the health of the host—its “terrain” or environment—deteriorated.
 His idea that microorganisms are necessary to good health, and that beneficial microbiota are pathogenic under the wrong conditions or in the wrong place, is now the standard view of researchers who study the microbiology of animals and plants. A new science of the microbiome—meaning, simply, the microorganisms in an environment—emphasizes that all plants and animals on Earth evolved in combination with microorganisms and asks how microbiota interact with their hosts. Over the last 17 years, we have learnt that countless functions in living things, from digesting food to regulating the immune system to germinating seeds, rely on microorganisms. More recently still, microbiome science has attracted huge sums of venture capital to fund companies that treat hitherto intractable diseases or swell agricultural yields.
First, beginning in 2001, scientists observed that mice with different microbiota had different biologies, suggesting that resident bacteria could modulate the host’s gene expression. Second, in 2006, researchers demonstrated that gut microbes could cause changes in a host’s phenotype, such as obesity. Finally, gene sequencing technologies developed for the human genome project were turned upon microbes in international projects like the Human Microbiome Project, freeing scientists from the limitations of culturing bacteria and revealing how microbial genes expressed themselves in their hosts. “People realized that [the microbiome] wasn’t some quirky, beautiful thing in biology, but was functionally crucial,” says Sonnenburg.
Microbiome science is a revolution in how humans understand and control biology. Pasteur’s theory of disease bequeathed to medicine a metaphor that germs were constantly besieging animals (battles in wars that were ultimately lost when bacteria overtook a corpse and it decayed). The metaphor was not the microbiologist’s fault; Pasteur knew we wouldn’t be healthy without microorganisms. But as Ed Young explains in his wonderful 2016 book, I Contain Multitudes: The Microbes within Us and a Grander View of Life, “Microbes… were cast as avatars of death. They were germs, pathogens, bringers of pestilence…. [Scientists] discovered the bacteria behind leprosy, gonorrhea, typhoid, tuberculosis, cholera, diphtheria, and plague… Bacteriology became an applied science, which studied microbes in order to repel or destroy them.”
But sterility is impossible in nature. Microbes cover everything and intrude everywhere. Microorganisms flourish at the bottom of the cold sea and in the vents of boiling hot springs; bacteria can even survive in radioactive waste. Between one to ten percent of the mass and half the cells in animals are microbiota. Sterility is also undesirable. Symbionts provide metabolic capabilities lacking in animals, such as vitamin B synthesis in termites and the digestion of grass in cows, and they modulate cellular signaling networks that regulate functions necessary for animal health, receiving in return nutrients and protection. Many plants are equally dependent on microbes: peas, clover, soy, and beans have nodules on their roots that host bacteria, fixing nitrogen from the air in the plant. In payment, the plants feed their commensal friends with sugars.
You, too: Your cells have around 20,000 to 25,000 genes, but your microbiome boasts 500 times more. More than 98 percent of your bacteria can be found in your colon; but other parts of your body have their own colonies where microbes have evolved to survive upon the oily plains of your face, in the humid swamps of your armpits, or on the slick rocks of your mouth. Your microbiota are mostly harmless, but many are functionally important to you also, crowding out more harmful microbes, teaching your immune system to recognize enemies, and influencing behavior like your appetite. One third of human milk is composed of sugars called oligosaccharides, but babies cannot digest them; the sugars are food for microbes, which furnish infants with essential nutrients that grow their brains and proteins that seal their guts.
Microbiologists often urge us to think of the microbiome as an organ, and it is. But the truth is weirder: animal and plants are multi-organismal creatures, composed of both animal or plant cells and microbial cells. We can only understand animals and plants by comprehending how they interact with the communities of microorganisms that live within and on their surfaces. But this insight was originally Béchamp’s; he understood that what we now call “dysbiosis” was just an imbalance or maladaption of the microbiome. He was the first to propose that some cancers were caused by bacteria. He would have been unsurprised to learn that a bacterial overgrowth in the small intestine leads to poor absorption of nutrients, which in turn cause unpleasant or serious symptoms, or that disturbances of the vagina’s microbiome can increase the risk of infection by HIV. In microbiology, the idea of terrain is today quietly resurgent. Janelle Ayres, a professor of immunobiology at the Salk Institute, is seeking to replace antimicrobials, such as vaccines, antivirals, and antibiotics, used to fight infections with the beneficial microbes in our guts for “damage-control therapeutics.”
These kinds of scientific resurrections occur from time to time in a complication of Thomas Kuhn’s episodic model of scientific progress (which holds that science advances as “paradigms” are overthrown when they no longer explain the world). The 18th century French naturalist Jean-Baptiste Lamarck believed that characteristics acquired in life could be inherited by succeeding generations, imagining that the giraffe’s long neck was the result of generations of prodigious stretching. The discovery of the structure of DNA buried Lamarkism, except in the Soviet Union, where it was Stalinist dogma. But over the last fifteen years, a new field called epigenetics has demonstrated that methylation, a chemical modification of DNA induced by the environment, can alter our genes: a remarkable echo of Lamark’s
original thesis. (Lamark's thesis is known as epi-genetics- Tossed aside for Darwin's elitist theory it's made a come back)
Sonnenburg cautions, “Many would say we still don't really understand [microbiome] functions now, but we do grasp their importance.” In common with many scientists, he wants to know a few things. First, what is a healthy microbiome anyway? “Humans evolved with an ancestral microbiome, which was lost during industrialization. Could the Western microbiome be a dysbiotic community that predisposes Westerners to chronic diseases?” (yes) Second, how quickly can researchers develop the microbiome for precision healthcare? “It’s individual, it's connected to most of our biology, and it's malleable: it seems perfect.” Finally, Sonnenburg wonders whether we want to rebuild our ancestral microbiome at all. Instead, he speculates, we might optimize our microbiomes for different goals at different points in life. ”A marathon runner might want something different from a pregnant woman, and a patient who needed immunotherapy might want something else.
In other words, can humans cultivate a better terrain for their symbionts? Put so, it doesn’t seem implausible. “Nothing is the prey of death, all is the prey of life,” said Béchamp.
Yes, this writer is pushing the idea of new ‘treatments’ based on tailoring microbiomes. Everything has to be exploited for profit-  But, you can have a healthier microbiome by eating better, fermenting some food (easily done on a counter top) And getting outdoors regularly. To boost those T cells!  To name just a few examples of ways you can take charge of your health.

Anxiously awaiting two books on this subject

1st- Bechamp or Pasteur?: A Lost Chapter in the History of Biology Paperback – Nov. 2 2011

This volume contains new editions of two books which have been available only sporadically in the decades since their publication. R. Pearson’s Pasteur: Plagiarist, Imposter was originally published in 1942, and is a succinct introduction to both Louis Pasteur and Antoine Béchamp, and the reasons behind the troubled relationship that they shared for their entire working lives.

Whereas Pearson’s work is a valuable introduction to an often complex topic, it is Ethel Douglas Hume’s expansive and well-documented Béchamp or Pasteur? A Lost Chapter in the History of Biology which provides the main body of evidence. It covers the main points of contention between Béchamp and Pasteur in depth sufficient to satisfy any degree of scientific or historical scrutiny, and it contains, wherever possible, detailed references to the source material and supporting evidence.

Virtually no claim in Ms Hume’s book is undocumented – to have access to more material, one would need to be able to read French, and go to the original source material.

The reader will soon discern that neither Mr Pearson nor Ms Hume could ever be called fans of Pasteur or his ‘science’. They both declare their intentions openly; that they wish to contribute to the undoing of a massive medical and scientific fraud. The publication of this present edition of their work is undertaken in the same spirit.
 2nd book:  Written by the man himself!  The Blood and Its Third Element Paperback – Dec 23 2016 by Antoine Bechamp (Author), David Major (Editor)

The last work by Antoine Béchamp, a man who should be regarded today as one of the founders of modern medicine and biology. During his long career as an academic and researcher in nineteenth century France, Béchamp was widely known and respected as both a teacher and a researcher. As a leading academic, his work was well documented in scientific circles. Few made as much use of this fact as Louis Pasteur, who based much of his career on plagiarising and distorting Béchamp’s research

A replay of history as we see  fraud Fauci reprising the role of Pasteur distorting the work of Kerry Mullis by bastardizing his PCR test - as has been stated previously here, by, your truly :)


  1. That Wired article reads like The Onion. The whole article is dedicated to showing how Béchamp was right, yet he is repeatedly called a "bitter crank". How someone can be comprehensively but not absolutely wrong is anyone's guess, but it's a good example of bludgeoning the English language into meaninglessness.

    Yes, you can ferment food on a small scale! I make sauerkraut and pickles in individual mason jars. The only time I managed to get crisp pickles was taking them fresh from the garden and putting them straight into jars to ferment, after a quick wash. You can get special lids with airlocks, but they're not absolutely necessary.

    I also make kefir. I get a fresh batch every day, and it's filled with a huge assortment of beneficial bacteria and yeasts. It was better when I had access to raw milk, but when you're stuck with pasteurized milk, it's healthier to use it as kefir. You can strain kefir to make a soft cream cheese type product which you can use for dips and dressings, sweet or savory, and you can give the strained kefir a second fermentation to thicken it up to a more yogurty consistency. I use mine almost exclusively in smoothies with a little fruit and coconut oil.

    Very interesting information, thanks Penny!

    1. Hi WaffletStaffel: Yes, the wired article was rather pathetic in it's presentation-
      " a good example of bludgeoning the English language into meaninglessness."

      Even the sentence
      "Béchamp is invoked only by anti-vaxxers and disciples of alternative medicine who believe that food is medicine."

      The origin of the idea of letting your food be your medicine is Hippocrates, for goodness sakes!


      In another text by Hippocrates, “De Alimento”, there's another statement about food, which reads: “In food excellent medicine can be found, in food bad medicine can be found; good and bad are relative.”

      and from where we get our Hippocratic Oath

      and when you read through the article what does the author state?
      They want to use the microbiata to and I'm quoting
      "seeking to replace antimicrobials, such as vaccines, antivirals, and antibiotics, used to fight infections with the beneficial microbes in our guts for “damage-control therapeutics.”

      the author is himself an "anti-vaxxer" clearly as he's looking for alternatives to vaccination.
      So he compromised himself, undoubtedly for $$$, expressing some good theory while not challenging the elitist Darwinian theory (survival of the richest, er I mean fittest)

    2. I have fermented on my counter top as well- you can ferment anything. I've done cabbage in the form of saurkraut and kimchi- our daughter has fermented zucchini and beans- both delicious- and yes, in jars- you don't need the airlocks- we've not used them at all
      I also have a SCOBY for my own Kombucha
      I make a batch weekly with fresh ginger and I love it!

      I used to do Kefir, but, I've had trouble with milk, so I froze my grains and will attempt to go back to them some time soon

      Kefir makes great pancakes-

      " You can strain kefir to make a soft cream cheese type product which you can use for dips and dressings, sweet or savory, and you can give the strained kefir a second fermentation to thicken it up to a more yogurty consistency."

      Yup and your welcome!

    3. "while not challenging the elitist Darwinian theory (survival of the richest, er I mean fittest)"

      I think you mix the political perversion of Darwin's theories by someone like Spencer and his ideas of "social Darwinism which was used to bolster the existing class structure of the British Empire with Darwins original idea, which in biology has had an impact only comparable to Einsteins general and special relativity for physics.

      The TOE is a theory and not a hypothesis because the mechanism of various routes of evolution, from genetic drift to natural AND artificial selection have been observed either historically through the fossil records through the genetic evidence available to direct observation of evolution in action.

      Breeding farm animals or crops and improving by artificial selection - human intervention - is the clearest prove of evolution, Darwin just made the jump from there to the mechanism of evolution by natural selection.

      To that mechanism of evolution have been added: mutation, non-random mating, gene flow, finite population size (genetic drift).

      And the misconception also seems to remain that the fittest means the individual to be fit, whereas "fitness" in evolutionary context just means how successful the individual(s) is (are) in leaving offsprings that propagate those beneficial traits that make the genetic lineage more successful in a given environment.

      For any one having some idea about biology, it has long been established that the microorganisms have an overwhelming role to play in the environment from decomposition of biological debris, the creation of soils, the supply of nutrients to plants, the supply of nutrients to plants and animals to the role they play in keeping the human body healthy, considering that the human body contains about as many microbial cells as human cells that to the most part guarantee our health.

    4. "Breeding farm animals or crops and improving by artificial selection - human intervention - is the clearest prove of evolution"

      Breeding animals and crops is more Lamarckian then Darwinian- in my opinion


      As Lamarck's theories gain credence at this time..

      Based on my admittedly limited understanding of these two competing idea- only Darwin's was acceptable to the elite classes because it gave them the justification of their status, power and right to dictate to others

      Lamarck's theories demonstrated the possibility that change, beneficial change, could and did occur in the short term

      If the dregs could improve their lot in life (through diet and the like, which could then be passed on to their progeny) they could challenge the status of the darwinian endowed elites.

      Everything comes down to politics and perception, that includes science. As we see today. And this is why I make the statement about Darwin's theory because it gained favour due to the fact that it served an elitist agenda.

      Sadly peterm, I don't think too many people have much if any idea about the microbial exchanges between.. everything.

    5. I should add the Darwin vs Lamarck is very much like the Pasteur vs Bechamp

      Pasteur elevated
      Bechamp relegated

      Yet as time goes on Pasteur, the plagiarizer is looking less and less credible (but he was certainly profitable and health destroying at the same time)

    6. Lamarck had the idea that acquired traits could be inherited by subsequent generations. Which was a possibility until the discovery of DNA and RNA as carriers of the genetic information and the absence of a mechanism how such acquired traits that effect somatic cells (all the cells in your body except could program the gametes - the sperm and egg - that are produced.
      It still is the case that no acquired trait can be passed on genetically to any future generation somehow , what however has been discovered is epigenetics: https://www.whatisepigenetics.com/fundamentals/

      "Epigenetics is the study of heritable changes in gene expression (active versus inactive genes) that do not involve changes to the underlying DNA sequence — a change in phenotype without a change in genotype — which in turn affects how cells read the genes."

      This still does not support Lamarcks ideas, but is a mechanism where environmental stressors can influence gene expression of the phenotype (the actual "being" created based on genetic information stored in the DNA)

      As to the politics of Darwinism (social Darwinism): that as I said is a perversion of the science of evolutionary theory that has been used based on especially Herbert Spencers idea and found its expression in Eugenics, an idea that even ideologies that did expressly deny the TOE like Nazism used to support politics to "improve" the human and even Margret Sanger, the founder of the first birth control clinics, was a supporter.
      To my mind such politicization for goals that have nothing to do with science is akin to blame the science of microbiology for the germ warfare attempts by various nations or blame the science of chemistry for poison gas weapons.

      All science, as the nuclear one has shown to the rather diminishing horror of mankind, provides tools that can be used either way, and unfortunately it seems that militaries worldwide are the first to abuse those supplied tools.

      To make it even more simple: a drill can be used to drill holes in the wall, or can be used to drill holes into the living body of a victim as had happened in Iraq.

    7. PS - the latter happened after the invasion when the USA threw money to various groups to rather fight among themselves than the US forces as the occupiers.
      I may mention that I was trained as a lab tech for more than three years (an apprentice ship in Germany), worked in research at a Max Planck Institute for three years and subsequently studied advanced agriculture and tropical agriculture.
      I had some opportunity to work as a farm manager for a full season in Canada but changed track as this job in the area in Canada I emigrated to (North East BC) was rather unsatisfactory mainly due to personality clashes.
      Subsequently I became an independent contractor in the gas and oil patch as a serviceman for industrial camps - more an exciting adventure on a daily basis than a job. The kind of job you are woken up by a phonecall at four in the morning to ask yourself: I wonder where I wind up today..

    8. Hi peterm- thanks for the additional insights
      I understand what you are saying wrt Darwinan theory and it's uses- my quibble is this... no matter then intention, cause the road to hell is paved with good intentions, Darwin's theory has been exploited for questionable purposes. And that creates a problem, for many of us.

      "To my mind such politicization for goals that have nothing to do with science is akin to blame the science of microbiology for the germ warfare attempts by various nations or blame the science of chemistry for poison gas weapons. "

      I understand that in theory- but it's the practice I have a problem with
      So we're on the same page really, but, looking at it from different perspective.

      As for Iraq- Horrid. but point taken

      Are you still in the oil patch?
      A service person for the camps? So you're not in the camps, like the oil patch workers are? You provide services, of some sort, to these camps?

      Interesting, undoubtedly
      I know someone who drives big machinery in Alberta.
      Crazy big machinery. Some of it around the oil fields.

    9. Hi, to answer your question.

      I retired in 2015 to the Azores after having spent from 1982 to 2007 in the patch setting up, tearing out, moving and maintaining and repairing camps and their equipment, most of the time self employed but for a few years as an employee running solo or with a small crew as a crew chief.
      I "retired" to a sales specialist position for heating, water and sewer supply equipment in 2007 due to a really bad back and arthritis in the knees. Likely the result of working too many hours between 0 to -40 in and around the camps.
      I used to work on camps from 24 man size side by side, end to end to 1000 man camps and anything in between. My specialty was gasfitting and running supplies on the larger installations but on the smaller camps I and maybe one other guy did everything, working usually from 5 -6 am. leaving back to home at midnight if you were lucky, or sometime moving for a week from camp to camp, getting calls on the sat. telephone or stopped by truckers who knew us.
      Free time in Winter was counted by the fraction of hours...by the time I quit in 2007 I was ready, the fun was off due to my body refusing to work that hard - before turning 55 I could work 48 hours straight through wit an hour nap and afterwards 12 hours sleep at home - after hat I felt just sick after 36 hours with sleep no relief. I loved the job, the excitement, working with anybody to supply a living space in the Canadian bush to the guys working there.
      Things changed with the advance of shale gas and horizontal drilling in about 2004 or so (I remember the first coil drilling rig I saw), camps stayed almost all winter in one location - multiple camps with 24 man crews either close together or on the same site and the drilling from only a few locations but many horizontal holes in parallel. Things really changed then.

    10. Thanks for sharing that :)
      Definitely interesting-

  2. I'm the publisher of the two books you mention in your excellent post. There has definitely been an increase in interest in Bechamp and his work over the last year or two. It's noteworthy that the people who did really interesting research in the past, such as Albert Howard, McCarrison, and Guy Wrench - are all on the same page when it comes to health, diet, and environment. Thanks for the mention - http://adistantmirror.com

    1. Thank you for stopping by here. The post has been well read, so clearly there is lots of interest in this subject!

      re: Bechamp and the terrain theory
      It's evident through this latest virus outbreak that terrain is the largest indicator of sickness

      As all those who were most adversely affected already had multiple comorbidities- indicating, clearly, their terrain was severely compromised.

      Thanks for the additional names/researchers you have left. More roads to go down :)


  3. Thank you! I have recently been reading Antoine Béchamp about the Terrain Theory of sickness. I'm glad that his theories are being expounded upon still today.

    1. Thank you for reading, considering an alternative from the main stream narrative- :)