A note on sceptics and media scare mongering

As with many natural alternatives today, there are websites and news articles attempting to discourage the use of MMS. Such articles often simply use 'a cunning play on words', and in many cases outright lies!

As an example of media lies, a TVNZ news report had interviewed a representative of the National Poisons Centre.
A voice over introduced the segment by stating "the National Poisons Centre said it's had 13 complaints in the past 6 years."

Through requesting a copy of these complaints from the poisons centre, the following lie by TVNZ was exposed, as seen in the Poisons Centre reply;
"Firstly I would like to clarify that the National Poisons Centre has never received 'complaints' about MMS. This was incorrectly reported by Television New Zealand. I have examined our call records and I have found 10 instances where the National Poisons Centre received phone enquiries following exposure to the product and 3 calls requesting general product information."
So the truth is that there were NO Complaints!

Stewart Jessamine from medsafe stated, "you are not supposed to swallow bleach in a concentrated form".
This misleads the public to think that this is what is being promoted. The protocols consist of swallowing very very diluted amounts, which have been proven safe for human consumption.

You may also find comments such as;

"The product (MMS), when used as directed, produces an industrial bleach that can cause serious harm to health."

It is true that when used as directed, MMS produces Chlorine Dioxide; and Chlorine Dioxide is a product that is also used as an industrial bleach.
It is also true that bleach can cause serious harm to health. 
But does that apply to all bleaches, and to all concentrations?

For example, oxygen is a bleach; but does that mean we shouldn’t breathe it?
In fact, oxygen (oxidation potential 1.28 volts) is a far stronger bleach than the Chlorine Dioxide produced using MMS (oxidation potential 0.95 volts); and will oxidise steel and other metals!

Also, don't let the word 'industrial' scare you; oxygen is also an 'industrial' gas, but that does not mean it is unsafe in the human body.

Using MMS for water treatment does result in ingesting small amounts of the product.
Bleach used in industry is between 1,250 to 10,000 times stronger than a typical MMS dose.
So the word ‘bleach’ is used in this case to promote fear; whereas in reality, certain bleaches are harmless and even essential to our bodily function.

In fact, people in quake stricken Christchurch were advised by authorities to put household bleach in their drinking water;

This clearly exposes the 'powers that be' as liars and hypocrites, if on one hand they say bleach is dangerous and shouldn't be consumed; and then they turn around and tell the public to put bleach in their drinking water.
The truth is, they know that it is one of the most effective pathogen killers around.
But unlike their recommendation to add 1 teaspoon of household bleach to 10 litres of water, unactivated MMS (sodium chlorite) only requires 1 drop per 4 litres of water (if waiting for 24 hours); and it wouldn't include other dangerous chemical additives used in household bleaches.
To purify water, MMS is much safer than household bleach!
In fact, there are no household bleaches in the world that use Chlorine Dioxide (MMS) as part of their formula.
Chlorine Dioxide is approved by the FDA for food contact use, whereas household bleaches are not approved for that purpose.

Other comments made include;

"It's not even a mineral"

If this were true, then it would need to be either an animal or a vegetable; but we can assure you that it is neither of these.
Remember from basic science that all substances can be divided into one of three defining groups: Animal, Vegetable or Mineral.

MMS IS a Mineral.

Other comments made include

"Even taken as instructed, experts say it (MMS) can cause severe vomiting and diarrhoea".

Well, you don't actually need an expert to say this; we state the same on the MMS instructions ourselves.
We firstly need to remember that vomiting is not a sickness, but is the body’s response to a sickness.
It is quite common to experience vomiting when sick; and when consumed as a pathogen killer in water, chlorine dioxide destroys disease and pathogens, which the body would then need to eliminate. If MMS is used in accordance with the instructions; then vomiting is seldom experienced.

Anyway, what are the implications of making such a statement;  

"Even taken as instructed, experts say it (MMS) can cause severe vomiting and diarrhoea"?

Are they trying to tell us that any products that cause vomiting and diarrhoea should be avoided?
And if so, how would that relate to Chemotherapy, which causes not only vomiting and diarrhoea,
but many other nastier side effects. If they are using an unbiased measuring standard, wouldn't they need to discourage the use off, and take Chemo off the market too?

Just for your interest, the medical journal Clinical Oncology, published the results of a study in December 2004, wherein it was shown that chemotherapy has a success rate of just more than 2% for all cancers. That's a FAILURE rate of 98%. [Source: Clinical Oncology (2004)16:549-560].

Other comments include; "mixing it wrongly could lead to respiratory failure."

So, are they saying that mixing it correctly won’t?
With regards to claims of more severe problems, it is quite likely, that if someone was to drink MMS straight, without activating; or in large volumes; or mixed it with other compounds (ie, mixing it wrongly)
; then in such a situation, yes, the above statement could also be true.

But this is nothing to be alarmed about.  

The exact same statements above also apply to most approved pharmaceutical drugs;
except in their case, taking incorrectly can cause death.

In fact, according to many statistical websites, even taking such drugs correctly will often cause death. Most chemotherapy products have 'death' and 'cancer' on their huge list of possible side effects; however, most chemo patients don't usually get to read the packaging!
According to many sources, approx. 300 people per day in the USA alone, die from correctly prescribed drugs.

Does this make you wonder why the FDA, and other such authorities, are not writing warnings in news articles and doing something about that!

To date, MMS has not been proven to cause the death of anyone.

So why do the FDA and other agencies appear to be discouraging many natural products, and yet are allowing dangerous drugs that are killing thousands?

Some sources claim that it has something to do with the money such agencies receive from the pharmaceutical companies????

It is also becoming aparent that more and more diseases are being 'created', so that drugs can then be marketed as the solution.
HIV and AIDS are an example of diseases that many experts are now saying were 'created'; and that they are not what most people think they are.
Two documentaries well worth watching on this topic are titled 'The AIDS Blunder' (28 minutes),
and 'House of Numbers' (88 minutes). Judge the evidence for yourself.
You will find both of these documentaries on youtube
, (include 'full version' in your search words). 
We suggest that you watch 'The AIDS Blunder' first.

These are a must see; they will give you a better understanding of what HIV and AIDS really are, and this information may also help you save the life of a loved one.

Double-blind testing

In America, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) only allows products to be marketed that have undergone strict double-blind tests.
That would prevent anything potentially dangerous to our health from coming on the market, right?

Although many other sources quote up to 60,000; the FDA itself estimates that the pain killer drug Vioxx, may have contributed to 27,785 heart attacks and sudden cardiac deaths ...

But hang on, Vioxx had passed the required double-blind tests!

How can a drug that has passed the ‘official’ testing, kill 60,000 people; before being reluctantly pulled off the market?

The diabetes drug Avandia, also passed the ‘official’ double-blind testing.
To pass the tests, it must have been proven to be safe, right?

A google search for ‘Avandia deaths’ will show otherwise, as with the example report below;

New Zealand medical authorities will investigate the New Zealand use of a diabetes drug, Avandia, alleged to be implicated in 100,000 cases of heart failure.

European officials have suspended the licence for rosiglitazone, the active ingredient of the drug, but the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has kept the drug on the market, with restrictions on access. FDA scientist and lead author of a US study David Graham, has asked for the pill to be banned and has said since Avandia was introduced in 1999, it may have been involved in 100,000 heart attacks, strokes, deaths other heart failures.

New Zealand regulator, Medsafe, today said it was aware of and would review both the European Union and the US decisions to determine how they might affect the use of rosiglitazone in New Zealand.

Hmmm, guess 100,000 cases of heart failure are no cause to just immediately ban the stuff!

The above cases (and many, many more), appear to expose double-blind testing to be some kind of a joke!

Shouldn't any proper testing and evaluation have picked up on these potential dangers?
A Royal Commision of Inquiry is normally carried out when an incident causes the death of a dozen of so people. So why don't we see such actions taken when a drug kills tens of thousands of people?

What’s going on with our authorities?

We are not sure, but following is an interesting article we stumbled across, which may help shed more light on the issue;

(Another highly recommended read on this topic is the book; 'Natural cures they don't want you to know about'; by Kevin Trudeau. Judge the evidence for yourself).


The FDA Regulations on Cures, Treatments and Healing.

Can Medical Nutrient Therapy from plants, fruits, vegetable and herb supplements with phytonutrients, vitamins, minerals, amino acids, essential fatty acids, CoQ10 and all botanicals have any effect on treating, curing or healing ADD, ADHD, OCD, ODD, PDD, Depression, Autism, Bi-polar or Asperger’s Syndrome?

The correct answer is, "We’re not allowed to say."
Answering that question truthfully is like insider trading, you know what’s going to happen, you just can’t tell anyone according to the FDA regulations. Is that true?
Here are the facts, make up your own mind.

From Webster’s Dictionary

Pathology. A disease marked by swollen and bleeding gums, livid spots on the skin, prostration, etc., due to a diet lacking in vitamin C.

An abnormal loss of water from the body, esp. from illness or physical exertion.

al-oe ver-a
The mucilaginous juice or gel obtained from the leaves of this plant, widely used as a laxative and in cosmetic and pharmaceutical preparations for its soothing and healing properties.

Can you publicly say that water cures dehydration?
No, not according to the FDA.
Any idiot who’s ever sat out in the hot sun all day without water can tell you a cold drink sure feels like it cured dehydration.
But the FDA says it hasn’t been proven. None of the above symptoms have gone through proper FDA testing.

Can you claim that vitamin C from a lime cures scurvy?
No? Since the 1400’s when England ruled the high seas, it was a State secret that limes cured and prevented scurvy. Ships with limes in the food came back with zero sailors infected with scurvy. That’s why sailors from England still until today are called Limys. So if we’ve known this fact for 600 years, why can’t we say it? The FDA says you can’t make that medical claim, it has yet to be proven.

Can you say that Aloe Vera can be used as a treatment for constipation or a cure for cuts and healing sunburns?
No! Webster’s says it does, right?
For 5,000 years everyone on planet earth has known Aloe Vera works great on cuts and sunburns. In fact, nobody disputes it.
Why can’t we say it?
Because the FDA says it hasn’t been proven.

The use of the words cure, treat or heal are all licensed and approved by the FDA. We’re not talking about the truth, we’re talking about the regulation. There is an official process for proof and without that proof, you can’t make the statement, it’s against regulations.

If you go to court, you get the law, not always justice and if you go to the FDA, you get regulations not necessarily the truth. Which means when Webster’s definition of dehydration is the lack of water, you are not legally allowed to state that water cures dehydration, because it hasn’t been FDA approved as such.

What can you say?
According to the FDA you can only say, "Water supports maintaining hydration." That’s it, nothing more.
According to FDA you can only say; "Vitamin C supports maintaining health." Nothing more, nothing less.
According to the FDA, you can’t say Aloe Vera treats sunburn, you can only say, "Aloe Vera maintains skin health."
If you make any claims, you can be fined and sent to jail.

What are the steps to using the words cure, treat or heal?
You have to put your product through phase 1 and phase 2 testing that usually involve double-blind placebo studies that start with a baseline and two closely monitored groups. The average time and cost is $500 to $800 million and seven to ten years to complete both, just to make one single claim. You have to spend the same time and money on each and every claim.

That means for vitamin C to claim to cure, treat or heal; swollen and bleeding gums, livid spots on the skin or prostration would be $500 million for swollen gums, $500 million for bleeding gums, $500 million for livid spots on skin and $500 million for prostration. That’s 2 Billion dollars to state what’s already in Webster’s and already accepted as blatantly obvious for over 600 years.

If a supplement company wants to sell vitamin C and be able to make that important medical claim on the bottle of their product, why don’t they do it?

Let’s say one company does decide to make that investment in time and money. After they have spent $500 million over seven years per medical claim and they can put the FDA approved medical claim on their bottle of vitamin C and then raise their prices to cover the huge expense of getting FDA approval. They can now put, "Vitamin C will cure, treat and heal scurvy for an extra 2 Billion dollars!"

All of the other companies selling vitamin C can now also make the same claim, but with out the cost of proving it to the FDA and they don’t have to raise their prices because vitamin C can’t be patented because it grows naturally in nature. This is the FDA catch-22 that will permanently keep all nutritional supplement companies who sell nutrients grown in nature from ever being able to make a medical claim.

You are NEVER going to be told what a supplement will do for you EVER.

Are you saying that all of the companies selling supplements such as natural, botanical, grown in nature vitamins, minerals, herbs, plants, fruits, vegetables, essential fatty acids and plain water including Aloe Vera, can’t tell the public what they do or how they work?

Yes. That is the FDA regulation and the law.
If someone asks you if water cures dehydration, the answer is no, that’s not the truth, but that is the FDA regulation.
If someone asks you if vitamin C heals scurvy, the answer is no, it’s not the truth, but it is the FDA regulation and the law.
If someone asks you if Aloe Vera will cool down a sunburn, the legal answer is no, even if it’s not the truth.

Why would the FDA do that?
Aren’t they here to protect the public?
Who is the FDA and who runs or controls them?

Ah, finally a good question. It’s an oxymoron to call it the Food and Drug Administration. We’re talking people’s health and there are two vastly different groups who would like you to spend money on your health from their products that are governed by this one agency.

If you have swollen and bleeding gums, livid spots on the skin and prostration (the definition of scurvy according to Webster’s), then food supplement companies who sell vitamin C would like you to buy their product. Drug companies would like you to buy their drugs for swollen and bleeding gums, livid spots on the skin and prostration. Only one will get to tell their story, the one with the most money and influence.

Unfortunately both companies are under one administration and they are competitors.
Have you ever wondered why you don’t see the KBPA (KKK and Black Panther Administration)?
Never seen the CAFA (Christian and Adult Film Administration) have you?
Because they don’t work together any more than drugs and nutritional companies work together, they’re competition.

That is why you don’t really have an FDA, you really have a DA. The FDA is for all intents and purposes the Drug Administration whose job it is to promote drug companies. You can’t serve two masters and one will always win over the other. The one with the most money, power and political connections will ALWAYS WIN. To be fair and ethical the government should have a separate Food Administration.

Ten years ago the pharmaceutical industry passed up oil and high finance as the number one money making industry on the planet. Selling nutrition isn’t even in the top 100. Every Congressman, Senator and President has been put into office with donations directly or indirectly from drug companies. There are over 200 drug company lobbyist for every one nutrition lobbyist.

There used to be 3 major stations on TV, and if you put ads on just one with a popular show, you covered most of America. Now there are over 500 stations. Advertising dollars per show doesn’t reach as many people as they used to because of so many channels. The Internet took 25% of all advertising dollars and left people scrambling for money to stay on TV.

It used to be illegal to advertise prescription drugs on TV for the simple reason, the public doesn’t need to know all of the prescriptions out there, that is the doctors job, that’s why the doctor went to med school, so they’d know which drugs to prescribe.

Now you see drug ads everywhere that end with, "Ask your doctor about brand X!" My doctor already knows about brand X, why am I asking him about it?
Hey Dr. Kildare, I want some Ritalin! Hey Tony Montana, I want some cocaine! If you just go to someone and ask for a drug, that’s called a drug dealer.

The only reason drug ads are on TV is because the worlds biggest money making industry filled the gap of the missing 25% advertising dollars going to the Internet and the rest being divided up to hundreds of other stations. The ads want you to go to your prescription drug dealer to get your fix.

So which programs do you think the drug companies singled out as the most important and the most influential?
Sesame Street?
Turner Classic Movies?
Turn on your TV and watch 20/20, 60 minutes, 48hrs, Investigative Reporter, Inside Edition, Cross Fire, Face the Nation, Primetime, Nightline, World News, Good Morning America, Meet the Press, Dateline, Fox News, CNN, MSNBC, NBC, CBS or ABC News. Watch commentators Larry King, Nancy Grace, Chris Matthews, Bill O’Reilly, Dan Rather or Peter Jennings.

Take out a piece of paper and keep track of drug and non-drug ads. Remember Q-tips are owned by a drug company. You’ll find that 50% of the money keeping your news shows alive are being sponsored and paid for by the world’s largest money making business which are the drugs companies. When the drug companies put their ads in just 25 news shows, they control the information on drugs and nutrition in their favor.

Likewise the FDA, NIH, AMA, hospitals and colleges are all flooded with drug money in the form of grants and research. If you try to say anything on the air, in a hospital or a college about the dangers of drugs or the safety and efficacy of nutrition, your very job could be at stake.
If someone is sharing with you information about an all natural supplement, don’t ask them if it’s FDA approved, it only shows your ignorance. Remember at one time Avandia, Crestor, Fen Phen, Zelnorm, Baycol, Meridia, Neurontin, Prempro, Celebrex, Risperdal, Pemoline, Cylert, Rezulin, Vioxx, Bextra and even LSD were all FDA approved until thousands of people died to force a recall.

Meanwhile the FDA prohibits companies who sell supplements that are non-toxic, non-addictive, non-drug interactive and 100% safe from making any claims on health benefits, "To keep the public safe!"

According to WHO, (World Health Organization) and JAMA (Journal of the American Medical Association) the third leading cause of death in America is FDA approved drugs that were properly administered by a family physician or hospital.

According to WHO and JAMA, America is the 37th healthiest nation on earth. America is number one in surgery, but 37th in health. We’re behind some 3rd world countries who use medicine men. The cost of sick care (you can’t call it healthcare, you’re not healthy) in America is 17 cents out of every dollar, the highest of any 3 other nations combined.

America with the FDA in charge spends the most money resulting in the unhealthiest people.

On one side of the government we have the United States FDA, on the other side we have the United States Patent Office. If you pull up numerous patents on nutritional supplements, you will find medical claims right on the patent, stating in fact what that nutrient will do.

ONE EXAMPLE: On one US Patent it states under AIDS: "Elimination of symptoms; m-RNA of HIV-1 is undetected; restored immune function."

Having AIDS means your immune system shuts down and you die, on the patent it states "restored immune function." Where is 20/20? Dan Rather? Half of an entire African generation is in danger of genocide due to AIDS and you are not allowed to mention what it says on a US Patent in public. Shouldn’t the news stations at least cover the patent as a possibility of hope?
Shouldn’t the Billions spent on drug research put 20 or 30 million aside to research something a US Patent already says works?

Would you like to know who has this patent?
I wish I could tell you, but the FDA says I can not. The FDA states that you may not quote a US Patent in public regarding a product.
This is for your safety.

My what? Safety.

What does AIDS do to you?
It kills you. I know some drugs have a high toxicity rating and can also kill you per their own FDA, LD 50 ratio. (Lethal dose 50%, how much you take to kill half the rats and how much you take to kill all of the rats).

How toxic is the supplement on the patent?
Zero toxicity. Zero?
Yes zero. So what is the downside to talking it?
They haven’t really found one yet as the nutrients come from the Aloe Vera plant which has been called, "The potted physician" for 5,000 years and is in the Bible numerous times.

It says it on the patent but you can’t quote the US Patent Office in public?
Yes, that is the FDA regulation.

When was the last time you even heard of an official cure?
My last recollection was 1927 when penicillin was listed as a cure for VD. So many doctors lost so much money from that cure who were not able to treat people with VD every week that all of the research with the heading of finding a cure, are really only interested in treatments, where you pay every month for the rest of your life. The money is in treatments, not cures. Cures cost money, treatments make money.

So does water cure or treat dehydration? No.
Does vitamin C cure or treat scurvy? No.
Does Aloe Vera cure or treat sunburns? No.
Do any nutritional supplements cure or treat ADD, ADHD, OCD, ODD, PDD, Depression, Autism, Bi-polar or Asperger’s Syndrome? No.

We hope that clears everything up for you, and helps you to look at this issue in the right perspective.

Back to home page.