Sydney Morning Herald ‘Double Faults’ on MMS

Since tennis is my favorite sport, I’ve been watching the 2010 Australian Open with interest. But that’s not the only reason for my fascination with the world ‘down under’. It’s a world I look forward to visiting one day soon, a desire born of its many natural wonders, and friendships developed with remarkable people I’ve met who call this island continent home.

Like many people around the world, Australians have embraced, and benefitted from MMS, the “miracle mineral supplement” product and protocol introduced by Jim Humble. While chlorine dioxide’s properties as a “selective” oxidizer has been known, and it has been used commercially for decades, Jim’s unique contribution was to see the potential of its use inside the human body, of which water comprises 70%-90%. Given that chlorine dioxide is considered a safe and effective way to disinfect municipal water systems, far superior to chlorination because it produces no carcinogenic byproducts like chlorine does, it is reasonable that it might be effectively applied to personal water treatment systems, inside the human body.

Jim Humble dramatically scaled down ingestion amounts and developed a way of generating chlorine dioxide, which only exists in gaseous form, but is stable in an aqueous solution. Supplies were plentiful and it could be made available inexpensively. Most remarkably, people exhibiting a wide variety of disease pathologies started getting well. It seemed like a miracle.

The effectiveness of MMS only seemed like a miracle because the standard treatment methods that we routinely use and believe in, are so ineffective. Yet, we continue to tell ourselves that our methods are “cutting edge,” when in truth, they do more to maintain a diseased pathological state, than to eliminate them. We have become a culture of the functionally diseased, drug dependent but non-addicted. Yet, MMS by simply cleaning up the water that flows through the body, MMS helped restore energy, functionality for people in too many different walks of life to create a “conspiracy” of good news, while creating no dependency. None of this was evident in two stories published recently in the Sydney Morning Herald.

Sylvia Fink’s death in the South Pacific, ostensibly due to ingestion of MMS, which we covered here months ago, finally made headlines in Australia’s major newspaper. In a national article titled, “Death in paradise,” “yellow journalism” donned a touch of irony, for when MMS is activated with citric acid, the combined liquids take on a yellowish tint as chlorine dioxide molecules begin to form in solution. A second article, published on the same day titled, “Deadly chemical being sold as miracle cure,” made it clear that the gloves are coming off and hitting below the belt, journalistically speaking, is okay.

As I mentioned, Ms. Fink’s passing, and the allegations associated with it, have been discussed here. I even published a reply written by Jim Humble, to Doug Nash’s (Sylvia’s husband) assertion that ingesting MMS “caused” her death. Nine months after her passing, no toxicological report has yet been issued. Now why is that?

If chlorine dioxide poisoning had been confirmed, it is likely that the report would have been issued a long time ago. However, we always looking for a palatable “smoking gun.” We don’t want to implicate already acceptable treatments or practices if they’ve been promoted as safe. What better than the new, “unapproved” chemical on the block? It it is responsible, let it be proclaimed. But if it is ruled out, why not clear it?

And if the culprit is the “tried and true” chemicals that were in Ms. Fink’s body, why not proclaim that? What about the chemicals that she routinely took in, which do not break down when ingested, and do create new chemical toxicities when combined with others? A toxicology report would reveal these truths too. Perhaps that’s why no report has been yet published, and the Sydney Morning Herald elected to report on emotions and innuendo, rather than on facts that would consider the best interests of all.

Then another twist.

On January 14, I received an email from a producer at 60 Minutes Australia, who wrote that he was “drawn to the amazing story of MMS,” and looked forward to viewing my documentary, Understanding MMS: Conversations with Jim Humble, in full. He wanted to schedule a background chat at how to present the topic for an Australian audience.

“GREAT!” I thought. MMS will be introduced to a much larger audience, and its potential to help humanity explored on a grander scale. A day or two later, a friend sent me the Sydney Morning Herald articles.

It’s been two weeks since I heard from the 60 Minutes producer. We have yet to have our background chat. This doesn’t mean that his interest has waned or that it won’t happen, since he contacted me several days after newspaper stories were published, but I wrote him to inquire anyway:

Hi J.

What happened to 60 Minutes Australia’s interest in the MMS story? I read the two Sydney Morning Herald articles, which give the public enough information to stimulate wariness toward MMS (even mis-characterizing it with allusions to bleach), while offering no insights into whether it actually has worked for anyone or why.

The fact that the newspaper published the story with such mis-characterizations prior to confirmation by a toxicology report, which itself has not been issued months after the incident, suggests an attempt to manufacture “smoke” from a gun that wasn’t even loaded. Indeed, it’s probable that the story was run when it became evident that damning evidence about MMS would not be found.

Your viewing audience should know the truth about MMS. They should also know the truth about their much larger reliance on chemicals “to heal and protect,” that are indeed toxic; chemicals prescribed every day with TGA (and FDA) approval, such as toxic anticoagulants that “thin blood” (e.g., Warfarin, and Coumadin) instead of naturally derived, non-toxic solvents (e.g., dimethyl sulfoxide or “DMSO”) that would safely dissolve plaque buildup.

Claims of “cures” to a myriad of disease pathologies associated with MMS aren’t being made by product promoters, but from experience consistently reported by a wide variety of people who demonstrated those pathologies. It is clear that we have no problem sharing bad news, and it’s almost funny to realize how quick we are to do so. So if MMS wasn’t helping a lot of people, then that would be the “rap” on the street about it. The Sydney Morning Herald’s proclivity to ignore facts and promote hysteria is exactly why I interviewed Jim Humble so many times and produced my documentary on MMS in the first place.

I do not sell MMS, nor am I an “advocate” for it. I am an advocate for understanding, of products, protocols, and methodologies that help healing without doing further harm. I am an advocate for human understanding of the true contributors to disease, and more importantly, true contributors to healing.

Many approved treatment methods currently practiced by modern medicine contribute more to disease than to healing. Yet, they go unquestioned and unchallenged. I’ll also add here that many people have associated MMS in mitigating such a wide range of pathologies because we operate under the mistaken assumption that disease pathologies are discrete and unrelated, when in fact, all “diseases” indicate some form of imbalance in the patient. Treatments that bring further imbalance (by taking life through chemical toxicity) will never help heal. The other mistaken assumption is that the treatments themselves “heal.” Only the body heals itself. If we put it back into balance, it will do everything else needed.

The far larger tragedy is that we do not operate by these simple truths. Yet, we will mis-characterize a product that is yielding useful results when implicated prior to scientific confirmation. If it is reported accurately, Silvia Fink’s toxicology report would most likely implicate the real cause of her death, a chemical that many people take routinely, without question, because it is “approved” by the authorities. It’s deemed far juicier to pin the blame on the “unauthorized,” than to report the truth.

As a producer for 60 Minutes Australia, I hope you are interested in the truth.

Best wishes,

Adam Abraham

Time will tell what happens from here.

Please follow and like us: