6
PASTEUR ALSO A FAKER: ANTISEPSIS
While many of Pasteur's contemporaries must have known of his plagiarisms from
Bechamp's work, they were probably cowed into silence, or kept out of the press by
Pasteur's bully-ragging tactics, as well as by his prestige, not only in the public eye
and with royalty, but also with the "academies and public bodies" Dr Lateud
refers to.
Miss Hume goes on to show that his treatment for rabies and his anthrax serum were the
same colossal failure and fraud, as will be shown in Chapter Eight, and she discusses
other plagiarisms on Pasteur's part, but it hardly seems necessary to go into all of these
matters here. We have seen enough evidence of incompetence and fraud to forever doubt any
further statements that bear his signature, but there is one more piece of work that is
worth looking into.
Some years after the events we have described, Dr M. L. Leverson, M.D., Ph.D., M.A., an
American physician, discovered some of Professor Bechamp's writings in New York and
immediately realized that they anticipated Pasteur in certain important points. He went to
France, met Professor Bechamp, and heard the story of the plagiarism from him, since which
time he has done a great deal to bring Bechamp's work to public attention.
He was one of the first in the United States to recognize Bechamp's priority in regard
to most of the discoveries generally credited to Pasteur, and in a lecture entitled
Pasteur, the Plagiarist, delivered at Claridges Hotel, London, on May 25, 1911, outlined
briefly Bechamp's claim to priority, and added the charge that Pasteur had deliberately
faked an important paper!
He said in part:
"Pasteur's plagiarisms of the discoveries of Bechamp, and of Bechamp's
collaborators, run through the whole of Pasteur's life and work, except as to
crystallography, which may or may not have been his own. I have not investigated that part
of his career, nor do I feel any interest in it. The tracings of some of these
plagiarisms, though they can be clearly demonstrated, are yet somewhat intricate, too much
so for this paper; but there is one involving the claim by Pasteur to have discovered the
cause of one of the diseased conditions which assail the silk worm, which can be verified
by any one able to read the French language. It is the following:"
After describing some of the material we have covered in Chapter 5, he continues:
"But I have a still graver and more startling charge to bring against Pasteur as a
supposed man of science.
* Scientific Bluff
Finding how readily the 'men of science' of his day accepted his fairy tales, in a
voluminous memoir of no value (published in the Annales de Chimie et de Physique 3rd S.,
Vol. LVIII), is to be found on page 381 a section entitled Production of Yeast in a Medium
Formed of Sugar, of a Salt of Ammonia and of Phosphates.
The real, though not confessed, object of the paper was to cause it to be believed that
he, and not Bechamp, was the first to produce a ferment in a fermentative medium without
albuminoid matter. Now mark, I pray you, what I say - the alleged experiment described in
the memoir was a fake - purely and simply a fake. Yeast cannot be produced under the
conditions of that section! If those of my hearers or any other physician having some
knowledge of physiological chemistry will take the pains to read this section of Pasteur's
memoir with attention, he will see for himself that yeast cannot be so produced, and he
can prove it by making the experiment as described.
Now mark what, supposing I am right in this, this memoir does prove. It proves that
Pasteur was so ignorant of physiological chemistry that he believed yeast could be so
produced, or else he was so confident of the ignorant confidence of the medical profession
in himself, that he believed he could bluff it through. In this last belief, he was
correct for a time. I cannot but believe that the exposure I am making of Pasteur's
ignorance and dishonesty will lead to a serious overhauling of all his work.
It was Bechamp who discovered and expounded the theory of antisepsis which Pasteur
permitted to be ascribed to himself. In his 'Studies on Fermentation,' Pasteur published a
letter from Lord Lister, then Mr. Surgeon Lister, in which that gentleman claims that he
learned the principles of antisepsis from Pasteur. I do not doubt this statement of the
noble Lord, for besides accepting Mr. Lister as a gentleman of veracity, I will give you
an additional reason for accepting that statement.
* Lister's Blunder
When Mr Lister began his antiseptic operations, they were generally successful, but a
few days later his patients succumbed to carbolic acid or mercuric poisoning, so that it
became a gruesome medical joke to say 'The operation was successful, but the patient
died.'
Now Mr Lister, though a very skilled surgeon and, I believe, having great powers of
observation, had established the technique of his operations upon the teachings of a man
who had plagiarized the discovery without understanding the principle upon which it was
based. Not unnaturally, Lister used doses of carbolic acid, which, when placed upon an
open wound or respired by a patient were lethal. But, thanks to his careful observations,
he gradually reduced the quantity of carbolic acid or sublimate of mercury employed, until
at last 'his operations were successful and the patients lived,' as they would have done
from the beginning, had he obtained his knowledge of the principles of antisepsis from
their discoverer, who had warned against the use of any but a very minute dose of carbolic
acid, instead of from their plagiarist, who did not know why the dose should be so
limited.
From the outline I have now given you, you may form some idea of the ignorance of the
man who, for more than thirty years, official medicine has been worshipping as a little
god. But this is only a small part of the mischief perpetrated. Instead of making progress
in therapeutics during the past thirty or forty years, medicine - outside of surgery - has
fearfully retrograded, and the medical profession today is, in my judgment, in a more
degraded condition than ever before in its history. I know that at first your minds will
rebel against this statement, but some facts will prove to every mind possessed of common
sense that it is true."
The Danger of Inoculating
After discussing the practice of medicine in the past and saying that since Jenner's
and Pasteur's days the modern effort is to make sick well, he says of inoculations:
"When a drug is administered by the mouth, as was beautifully pointed out by Dr J.
Garth Wilkinson, in proceeding along the alimentary canal it encounters along its whole
line a series of chemical laboratories, wherein it is analysed, synthesized, and
deleterious matter prepared for excretion, and finally excreted, or it may be ejected from
the stomach, or overcome by an antidote.
But when nature's coat of mail, the skin, is violated, and the drug inserted beneath
the skin, nature's line of defence is taken in the rear, and rarely can anything be done
to hinder or prevent the action of the drug, no matter how injurious, even fatal it may
be. All the physicians of the world are incompetent either to foresee its action or to
hinder it. Even pure water has been known to act as a violent and foudroyant poison when
injected into the blood stream. How much more dangerous is it, then, to inject poisons
known to be such, whether modified in the fanciful manner at present fashionable among
Vivisectionists or in any other manner. These simple considerations show that inoculation
should be regarded as malpractice to be tolerated only in case of extreme danger where the
educated physician sees no other chance of saving life.
The Germ Theory Fetish
Now the forcing of these inoculations upon individuals by law is one of the worst of
tyrannies imaginable, and should be resisted, even to the death of the official who is
enforcing it. English speaking people need to have ideals of liberty refreshed by a study
of the history of Wat Tyler, who headed one of the most justifiable rebellions in history,
and although treacherously murdered by the then Lord Mayor of London, his example should
be held up to all our children for imitation ..."
But revenous a nos monutous; the entire fabric of the germ theory of disease rests upon
assumptions which not only have not been proved, but which are incapable of proof, and
many of them can be proved to be the reverse of truth. The basic one of these unproven
assumptions, the credit for which in its present form is wholly due to Pasteur, is the
hypothesis that all the so called infectious and contagious disorders are caused by germs,
each disease having its own specific germ, which germs have existed in the air from the
beginning of things, and that though the body is closed to these pathogen's germs when in
good health, when the vitality is lowered the body becomes susceptible to their
inroads."
I agree most heartily with Dr Leverson's statement that "the forcing of these
inoculations upon individuals by law is one of the worst tyrannies imaginable, and should
be resisted even to the death of the official who is enforcing it." Strong words, but
absolutely right!
Professor F. W. Newman of Oxford University has said:
"Against the body of a healthy man Parliament has no right of assault whatever
under pretence of the public health; nor any the more against the body of a healthy
infant. To forbid perfect health is a tyrannical wickedness, just as much as to forbid
chastity or sobriety. No lawgiver can have the right. The law is an unendurable
usurpation, and creates the right of resistance."
And Blackstone says:
"No laws are binding upon the human subject which assault the body or violate the
conscience."
In the case of the Union Pacific Railway vs Botsford, the United States Supreme Court
said:
"... no right is held more sacred or is more carefully guarded by the common law
than the right of every individual to the possession and control of his own person, free
from all restraint or interference of others, unless by clear and unquestioned authority
of law.
As well said by Judge Cooley:
"The right of one's person may be said to be a right of complete immunity; to be
let alone."
(Cooley on Torts 29)
"The inviolability of the person is as much invaded by a compulsory stripping as
by a blow. To compel anyone, and especially a woman, to lay bare the body or to submit it
to the touch of a stranger, without lawful authority, is an indignity, an assault, and a
trespass." (141 U.S. 250)
In 1903 Judge Woodward of the New York Appellate Court said in the Viemeister case:
"It may be conceded that the legislature has no constitutional right to compel any
person to vaccination."
(84 N.Y. Supp. 712)
In the Supreme Court, Columbia County, N.Y., in 1910, Judge Le Boeuf, in the second
trial of the Bolinger case, instructed the jury as follows:
"Now I have charged you that the assault which is claimed to have existed here due
to the forcible vaccination, that is, if it was against this man's will, is one which you
must consider. And the reason of that is: This man, in the eyes of the law, just as you
and I and all of us in this courtroom, has the right to be let alone. We all have the
right to the freedom of our persons and that freedom of our persons may not be unlawfully
invaded. That is a great right. It is one of the most important rights we have."
I believe these quotations from court documents indicate clearly that anyone has a
right to protect himself or his family from the pus-squirters of the A.M.A. by any means
that may be available, and use as much force as may be necessary, even, as Dr Leverson
says, "to the death of the official who is enforcing it."
Over 60 years ago the famous English physician, Dr Charles Creighton, said in Jenner
and Vaccination (1879):
"The anti-vaccinationists have knocked the bottom out of a grotesque
superstition."
However, it has been revived, and needs some more 'knocks'.
The doctors will not willingly give up such a lucrative practice as the use of
biologicals, and so parents and the public must do something to stop this blood-poisoning.
What will it be?
I have seen a little girl, upon being vaccinated (or 'inoculated'), go to school,
promptly develop 'leaky heart valves' and die of 'heart trouble' about two years later,
hardly ten years old. I don't believe that either her parents, schoolmates, or teacher, or
even the doctor concerned, saw any connection between the vaccination, or inoculation, and
the leaky heart valves - but there was a connection - see my pamphlet The So-called
Biologicals have Created a New Form of Heart Disease.
And thousands of such deaths are caused every year. What are we going to do to stop it?
In the whole history of mankind, the only adequate answer to tyranny humanity has had
has been death to the tyrant; and the A.M.A.-ites have been tyrannical in their efforts to
sell their decayed animal-pus biologicals for many years. I believe that if these efforts
at compulsion, coercion or compulsory laws to force the use of any kind of biological or
so-called "tests" of any kind are pushed much further, they will lead to
trouble.
As we show in this book, the underlying "germ theory" is a fraud, and
everything based on it is also fraudulent, and should be forbidden by law; and when the
public fully realizes what a colossal fraud the use of these decayed animal-pus
concoctions is, you won't even be able to jail a man for shooting a pus-doctor who tries
to vaccinate, inoculate, or 'test' his children.
We will outline, further on, a safe method of controlling infections.
Dr Leverson goes on to describe disease as nature's attempt to eliminate waste, and
diseased tissues as being due to improper living; and suggests plenty of fresh air, the
best of sanitation, very scanty clothes such as gymnasium costumes for everyday use, and a
scientific study of diet; he believes overeating causes "an enormous number of
diseased conditions".
All of these ideas would undoubtedly lead to better health and longer life than can be
obtained through serology.
It is now over 30 years since Dr Leverson expressed the hope that his
"exposure" would lead to a "serious overhauling" of Pasteur's work,
and it should be done by someone who understands physiological chemistry.
I feel as he seems to - that the allopathic mind is hardly to be trusted with such
important work!
|