Microbe Food-Poisoning; Fact or Fiction?

No matter how many times I revisit the microbe food-poisoning issue, people have extreme difficulty grasping the reality of it. Consider ourselves in the Dark Ages where we believe Earth is flat. Although we see that the moon, sun and planets are round, we cannot fathom that celestial objects are balls rather than circular disks. Why? Because clergy, teachers and representatives of the elite control education, that is, what is taught, acceptable and learned. We are ridiculed if we think too differently.

Now, let's return to the present. We are in the same circumstance today. All academic thought has been tunneled into junk science to protect industrial and economic values that have nothing to do with human welfare and well-being. The present BP oil gusher and the way it has been handled is the best evidence of that. Countless millions of people will suffer and die because of it.

The imposed microbe food-poisoning perspective of our time is a prejudicial perspective. It is completely tunneled into a framework created and controlled by pharma/medicine. How do they control that perspective? The few major pharmaceuticals use the medical industry as their puppet. Big Pharma (as it is called) controls and finances tests, controls how they are interpreted to be drug-favorable and then published in "Peer-review" magazines.¹ They finance major university research and funding. They promise scientists and researchers enormous shares in profits for drugs and/or prestige.

The medical prejudicial perspective of microbes is invested in finding inner and outer culprits that can be treated with medical drugs. If they can scare us into fear, or at their best scare us into terror, we will unwittingly attack the nature of our bodies. However, the basic factors that could identify any microbial direct scientific link to any food are not within our present scientific resources. Probably, that limitation is purposeful.

If people realized that most negatively interpreted microbe detoxifications were unrelated to a specific contaminated food, people would have to acknowledge that their diets are causative. That would destroy the processed food and the medical industries. Big Pharma would fall fast and hard. People would realize that most cases of so called "pathogenic illness" are unrelated to a particular food but are related to an accumulation of toxic food-stuffs in the body from their diets, either in the stomach or intestines or being eliminated through those walls, resulting in vomit and diarrhea.

All of those minds that argue microbe nonsense- science and discovery approaches accusing raw milk or any food of causing immediate foodborne illness should be ignored. Just as any racial prejudice must be learned and ingrained, present prejudicial microbe- science is taught from within our homes through media and nonsense advertising through to our universities. Notice that the CDC, FDA and biologically trained minds argue that microbes may not be found in the food that caused an "epidemic" because they were "killed-off". You cannot have it both ways. If you have a bacterially contaminated product, bacteria may die but the bodies do not disappear. If there are no bodies, the product under investigation could not have been causative of a microbial illness, period. Such lawyer-type garble from microbiologists simply confuses people. Is that their intent?

The following question has been posed to me numerous times: If lots of people spontaneously get sick from the same batch of food, then it seems that food is contaminated, correct? That is likely to be correct in the following case. Consider that bacteria get diseases like other organisms when their food sources are contaminated/processed. They suffer comparable experiences to vomit and diarrhea as a response to consuming contaminated processed food. People who consume such a product could get sick from their wastes but not directly from bacterial presence in the food. The contaminated processed food causes the bacteria to get sick and consequently consumers to get sick. In such cases, food would have a direct impact causing vomit and diarrhea.

In nearly a hundred experiments before I began eating only raw foods, I consumed bacteria-laden cooked and processed food. I experienced vomit in over half of the experiments and sometimes diarrhea. After becoming a raw-food eater, I experimented thousands of times with microbe-laden raw foods including raw milk, meats and eggs. I experienced vomit several times when the meat or eggs were from non-organic sources. Most immediate food-poisoning in raw foods is not from bacteria but additives/ chemical poisons that rarely if ever get blamed. Foods are rarely if ever analyzed for additives/chemical contamination including fertilizers, pesticides, herbi- cides, hormones and genetically modified food- allergens.

The food industry controls the food market. How?! By supporting the theory that inner and outer microbe-culprits are to blame for disease. They do not want their additives scrutinized. They rejoice in the ignorance that predominates our health departments. They support the mythic bacteria-theory that imprisons our entire civilized world; this theory is mainly media and education-driven. If they can get "educated" people to believe that spinach, which we have been educated to believe is our greatest iron- rich muscle-building food epitomized by the character Popeye, can cause disease when fertilized naturally with the Earth-old fertilizer manure, you can get those "educated" people to believe that we should outlaw raw and naturally occurring foods.

What is left that is safe? According to Food-Giants, their lobbyists and supporters, only chemically grown processed "foods" are SAFE and the unproved conclusion is that they are healthy. Advertisers, media, education and politicians are the world's greatest liars.

Appraise the antics of Food Giants (technically a misnomer because their products are all chemical and not food). Take for example Coca Cola. It wanted to expand its beverage business. In about 1996, the chemical beverage company decided to acquire the fastest-growing and most lucrative of beverage companies that had mass moral appeal, California- based Odwalla juices company.

A smokescreen was established where huge Procter and Gamble would make beverages for Coca Cola but the profits for Coca Cola would be meager. The smokescreen was to distract other beverage companies and the public from noticing their maneuvers on Odwalla. Behind the scenes, Coca Cola's secret agents were preparing to defame Odwalla into ill repute.

In 1996, they targeted an area in Washington State where many people drank Odwalla juices. Those agents manipulated health department employees into accusing a batch of Odwalla apple juice for so-called E.coli food-poisoning in 10 of 13 people. What contaminated the other 3? They had not consumed Odwalla juices, so they were ignored. To this day, I have not been able to obtain the documents claimed to prove Odwalla juice as culprit. I was refused names, addresses and investigative documents into the issue. Why the secrecy?

The incident was publicized, of course. Soon Colorado health officials claimed the juice had damaged 4 people. Now, consider that over 40,000 people had consumed apple juice from that particular batch. Why did only a tiny fraction of those people "get" E.coli "food-poisoning" if the apple juice caused the vomit and diarrhea? At least 30,000 people should have experienced vomit and/or diarrhea.

All of the ridiculous notions of "fingerprinting" as a means to isolate and trace bacteria are nonsense. Any microbiologist with more than cursory intelli- gence can see the junk science that is used in bacterial fingerprinting. The fingerprinting label was used to legitimatize the science without proper science. People were led to think that because literal fingerprinting is a fairly good science that bacterial "fingerprinting" must be accurate. That is a false and dangerous assumption.

Odwalla was a company of people who really cared about the health of people. They got into the business because they wanted to do good, providing raw juices with all of the vitamins, enzymes and nutrients unadulterated. Although the science was not definite that it was Odwalla juice that caused those 14 vomits and/or diarrhea, Greg Steltenpohl of Odwalla said the company issued its recall of thousands of juices because its primary concern was for the "safety and health" of its customers. They were duped.

Odwalla was fraudulently defamed and Coca Cola bought the company in 2001 for a pittance of what it had been worth if Odwalla had not been defamed. Coca Cola representatives acted like they were a caring mother, offering to help Odwalla out of its guilt-ridden conscience, buy its company and make the lawsuits and ill repute disappear. Odwalla's creators may not have sold to Coca Cola if all of the microbe-related law suits were not pending.

To consider the degree that the good people of Odwalla were duped, you must consider that in 17 tests, I was unable to get E.coli from fecal matter felled from cows, goats or sheep to grow in pure fresh raw apple juice. I was able to get E.coli to slightly populate when fecal matter was taken fresh directly from intestines of a cow and spiked into apple juice but all E.coli died in less than 2 hours. Since the E.coli was inactive, even theoretically, how could it have caused illness? There are only inferences that the apple juice caused illness and not any accurate science.

I hear all of the scientific voices shouting, But it was E.coli 157:H7! As I stated in a previous edition of this newsletter, E.coli 157:H7 does not exist in nature. It appears to be a genetically modified manmade bacteria that must be introduced.

At the time of the apple juice escapade, Don Schlimme with the University of Maryland suggested the apples could have become contaminated through feces from cows grazing near an apple orchard. Why was this Schlimme character, far from Washington or Colorado, interviewed for this situation with no direct knowledge, only opinion and conditioned health- department rhetoric? Because he stated exactly what Coca Cola wanted. He said that pasteurization would have killed the bacteria in the Odwalla products; that when people drink nonpasteurized juice, they run the risk of becoming sick; and they should boil juice before drinking it.

Boiling juice is another process that families do not have time to do, so they must buy boiled juice from a store, profiting beverage producers and sellers. The story does not end there. As I established above, Coca Cola is a company that demands the highest profits through any means it can, even criminal. Coca Cola wanted to eliminate any competition from other juice companies such as Naked Juice Company. They wanted to ensure the greatest profits, meaning little or no spoilage and returns. How is that accomplished with raw juices containing healthful bacteria that cause fairly rapid digestion and fermentation? You cannot, so you pasteurize them to insure at least 2 more weeks of shelf-life in refrigeration. The apple juice incident and Schlimme's opinion were not enough to make pasteurization of juices into law. It had to be legislated.

This is the most immoral of corporate schemes. A little girl who was said to have been harmed by the apple juice developed Hemolytic-Uremic Syndrome (HUS). Her kidneys dissolved and she died. The mother was brainwashed into believing that the "E.coli-ladened" apple juice caused her daughter's HUS and death. However, antibiotics often cause HUS, especially Cipro, the antibiotic used to treat the little girl's bloody diarrhea², and aspirin and other painkillers that prevent clotting caused the bleeding to continue.

Coca Cola agents told the mother that her daughter could have been spared if the apple juice had been pasteurized. They sponsored her to take it to the US Congress to get a law passed that would criminalize the commercial sales of bottled raw juices. Paid lobbyists assisted her. They financed the literature and got puppet health officials to appear before congress and make absurd claims of impending deaths from raw juices. Just about every sucker in the civilized world will fall for "Raw apple juice killed a little girl and it should be outlawed."

Where is the objectivity that those "highly" educated people are supposed to embody? If bacteria were the killer that health departments, pharma, medicine, advertisers, education and food producers claim, animals would be dying like flies all over the world. They lick fecal matter from each others and their own anuses daily, even animals who meet for an instant. Primitive tribes and economically poor people all over the world would be dying like flies because they do not wash their hands after touching animals, fecal matter and handling their food and eating. They may bathe once weekly or monthly. It seems that education has made us into stupid creatures with facile intricate brains that can handle lots of complex issues, have faith in science and industries but no common sense.

Let's return to the microbe-food-poisoning issue. Most cases of diarrhea and vomit are not the result of a particular food at the time of consumption. Most often, vomit and diarrhea result from accumulated substances from processed food that are absorbed through intestinal walls and into the body, or from injections or consumption of medicines. Vomit and diarrhea often result when the body decides to discard those toxins or the cellular-destruction-waste caused by those toxins. If stomach or intestinal walls are damaged during detoxification, bleeding may result.

Many astute individuals argue that many people experiencing vomit and diarrhea simultaneously is evidence of microbial food-poisoning. I argue that it is not. Most detoxifications are seasonal. Are bears contagious; since they seem to appear simultaneously but appear in USA first and then in Canada and then Alaska? Similarly, bacteria, that cease hibernation in usually climatically-inspired cycles, create such detoxifications as colds, vomit and diarrhea, appear- ing simultaneously amongst many people. However, the pharma/medical profession makes big bucks on the myth that colds, vomit and diarrhea are contagious, unhealthy and must be stopped or prevented. Those bacteria are doing their job of cleansing certain types of waste or contamination at cyclical times for most people.

Food does not have to be pasteurized or processed to be safe and health-giving; that is a present-day developing myth. Food does not have to be raised with chemical fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides and be genetically modified to be safe and health-giving; another present-day developing myth. Food is not a chemical derivative of food. Most foods in markets today are not foods at all but merely plastic versions of real food with indefinite shelf-lives. In fact, the only safe health-giving food is raw, unpasteurized, unprocessed, and non-chemically-exposed naturally evolved (non-GM) raw foods.

One more case that disproves microbes cause disease: Remember from my books that I was always a sickly child and after a vagotomy at 20 years old, I was told that I would die from eating anything raw. I was instructed that I had to at least steam bananas and apples if I wanted to eat them or the microbes that are in them would kill me. As I relive those medical terrorist statements, I realize that they are beyond ignorant, they are stupid. I have eaten microbe-laden foods everyday for 41 years, am 63 and 42 years beyond the death-sentence given to me by medical doctors. If we, every one of us, do not make the time to fight the legislatures who are financed by Big Pharma and Big Food, we will lose our access to health-giving foods. It will be criminal to grow or possess health-giving raw foods. We will be condemned to disease, like it or not.

It is time for us to take off the gloves and fight for our rights. We must look closely at congress persons who introduce bills that contain legislation that will deprive us of rights to healthy raw food. We must look closely at any congressional member who co- sponsors such a bill. We must make them suffer by disrupting their lives while and after they are in office and we must let them know our stance on health and nutrition. How do we do that legally?

For example, when Governor Schwarzenegger vetoed our hard earned SB201 bill in California that would have reinstated our ability to buy healthier raw milk in stores, we should have faxed, called, mailed, emailed and picketed him everyday all day long until he signed the bill. We should still be harassing him for his violation to our health. We should still be harassing every member of California Senate and Assembly.

But why would we want to harass the California congressional members; they passed almost unani- mously our bill? Because they had the ability to override Schwazeneggar's veto but would not even consider it. It is one of the time-old routine side-steps of placating the people into thinking that they have a voice in law. You may get a little law, fairness and justice in local government but on State and Federal levels, politicians are bought and paid. Behind closed doors, politicians rob citizens of everything with a one-minute-signature veto. In this case, one politician took the flack while most legislators looked good and we the people still do not have the right to better health.

As long as we do nothing, they have nothing to fear and we will lose our most precious asset, our health. Unless you enjoy suffering disease while immersed in high lifestyles, our health is basic and primary. Everything else pales in comparison when you have suffered disease. Take every spare moment you have and picket, call, fax, email and mail all of your representatives daily to let them know what you think. If you can think of any other way to persuade them, do it.

¹ Internet-search associate professor of medicine, and family and preventive medicine at the University of California at San Diego Dr. Beatrice Golomb, M.D., Ph.D.'s research showing and proving how Big Pharma manipulates the scientific method to their benefit and people's detriment.

² I read several test reports on Cipro when it first hit the market. A large percentage of the test animals suffered kidney symptoms that were identical to HUS. During the first year on the market, even the information insert in Cipro packages warned of kidney problems as a side effect. A year after, the mention of kidney complications disappeared from the insert.