A Real Life ‘Clinical Trial’ Opportunity for MMS

Many new people are being introduced to MMS, the “Miracle Mineral Supplement,” in part due to the FDA warning against it, but also, from more credible sources; i.e., doctors and other health care practitioners who know that, when used as directed, it is a safe, effective, powerful, and inexpensive detoxifier. While it’s not likely you’re going to see Dr. House recommend using MMS to stop flesh-eating bacteria (although it would) anytime soon (perhaps by next season), a growing population of naturopathic, chiropractic, and even some quiet MD’s have studied the chemistry, weighed the evidence, and seen the potential benefit, enough to incorporate it into their practice.

As such, there is also a growing demand for information about MMS, not so much from those who want to shut it down, but from people who want to help themselves and others improve their well-being in spite of the myriad of “ordinary” factors that tend to compromise health, which start at the most basic, fundamental, and overlooked of areas; water.

Water content in the body.
Water content percentages in an adult human body.

The human body is over 70% water, by weight. However, life doesn’t begin that way. While in utero, upon its inception and development into a human form, the body is almost 100% water. Water is — as I suggested at a talk I gave with Ann Cullen in London at the NutriCentre in the Hale Clinic — the medium by and through which we enter this world. We are not physical forms; we are intelligent, living consciousness. Our bodies are energy and informational patterns that coalesce, organize, and form in water. If the water is not pristine, balanced, and energy rich; if it is unbalanced and full of distortion, then how can the formation, and hence the pregnancy flawless? Healthy water creates healthy bodies. And yet, water is routinely deadened, by adding chlorine and other chemicals, with apparently little concern over how this simple, accepted practice may be contributing to the health problems that show up later in life. The good news is that water’s health can be restored easily.

A water station in Cite Soleil district in Port au Prince, Haiti
A water station in Cite Soleil district in Port-au-Prince, Haiti

For a reminder of the importance of water we have to look no further than the unfolding events in Haiti. Still reeling from a devastating earthquake in January 2010, Haiti’s citizens are now dying of cholera. This is a clear, direct, and timely example of the ramifications of unhealthy water run amok. However, instead of looking at how to deploy a proven water purifier in the chlorite matrix, the main therapeutic component in MMS, the authorities — including the CDC — are compiling an arsenal of antibiotics with which to treat people after the fact. They want to deal with the effects by trying to kill the bugs (if they can), but not the cause, which would be done by clarifying the water.

The World Health Organization’s (WHO) solution includes powdered chlorine, which continues the cycle of producing derivative contaminates, the trihalomethanes or “THM’s”. This demonstrates either how blind the establishment has become to fundamental causes of illness and disease, or how indifferent they are.

I believe that chlorination and fluoridation, which produce halogen substitutes for chloride (Cl-) — essential in the proper function of the Krebs Cycle — is a direct cause of full spectrum of health problems, including breast cancer. This theory could be tested in a “clinical trial” by simply selecting a method that does not inundate the body with carcinogens, ensuring sufficient chloride and oxygen uptake, and seeing what happens.

I drank some of the bottled water when I visited Haiti in April, and my throat tensed up as it went down. Its energy was so chaotic, it seemed to be dryer than before I swallowed. The label on the bottle indicated that it was “purified,” produced via reverse osmosis process. However, biologically inert, processed water alone is not the solution. For there to be health or healing, the water itself must be healthy, energy-rich, and coherent. There are some water sources that naturally fit that criteria, and technologies that can transform existing water and restore its coherence.

Used on a large-scale basis, the chlorite matrix would certainly deliver sufficient oxygen to safely disinfect the water and make it safe to drink. Barring that, with the help of Jim Humble’s protocol, MMS can be used effectively and safely to generate a detoxified version of chlorine dioxide (ClO2-) in smaller quantities, to be added to water before drinking, or it can be taken internally to prevent, or arrest cholera on the back end.

MMS is effective against cholera, malaria, and dengue fever.
MMS is effective against cholera, malaria, and dengue fever.

Not being satisfied with people simply being well, certain “scientists” would prefer risking the deaths of countless individuals by withholding treatment to a control group via a “double-blind” study in order to prove that the new treatment worked. When you’re talking about a drug that didn’t exist a year ago, and itself is synthetic, it makes sense. But the chlorite matrix has proven itself to be a natural disinfectant, yet we have kept it in the closet when it could have been used extensively to save lives.

Jim Humble’s 5-day workshop covers many ways to prepare and use MMS, along with a wide range of situations in which it might apply. He discusses the protocols, which have been updated, and shows how to prepare it, in small amounts for personal use, or for large.


Just click the player below to listen.

Written by 

Related posts

69 Thoughts to “A Real Life ‘Clinical Trial’ Opportunity for MMS”

  1. David

    Perception is reality. Too bad that some people choose to blindly rely on the establishment rather than have 1. faith, and 2. trust in their own experience. MMS works, and I don’t need a government approved clinical trial to prove it. God bless the warriors of Truth!

  2. AAMF is not a label, just shortening. If the shoe fits, you may wear it!
    You see, it is a difference if you are just AAM and that’s fine, but if you try to force your opinion onto others and get abusive, like many of you do, than that is fanatic, because you don’t care who you hurt in the process. We KNOW from experience, and we have the right to do with our health what is best for it. If years of medication did not heal me, but MMS did it in 2 days, that WHO ARE YOU to try to stop me from being healthy and staying that way!

    1. I don’t think anyone is anti alternative medicine, just anti dangerous and unproven therapies. If alternative medicine is shown to be safe and effective, then I’m all for it.

      The trouble with MMS is that no-one has shown it to be safe and effective, and there is some pretty good reason to believe that it is dangerous.

      1. I did not say that not ‘everybody’ is anti alternative medicine. That is why I say, if the shoe fits, wear it. 😛

      2. No, but you said that those skeptical of MMS are anti alternative medicine. No-one here is anti alternative medicine. Who do you think is? Or do you agree that no-one is?

      3. Adam, that is where you are wrong!
        Here are many anti-alternative medicine fanatic, and they are not only against MMS but all alterbatibes.
        This is why I will not listen to such people. Remember how I was called a quack, because I’m a Reiki Master. You don’t seem to have read all the comments made by some members here, and some of them were made on facebook, but by the same people. 🙂

      4. Monika, you are confusing 2 separate issues.

        1. Alternative medicine versus conventional medicine.
        2. Unproven, quack remedies versus treatments of proven efficacy.

        I think the people you describe as being “anti alternative medicine” are simply “anti unproven quack remedies”. I don’t think anyone has anything against alternative medicine if it is proven to be useful.

        It’s an easy mistake to make, because much of alternative medicine is unproven. Nonetheless, it is an important distinction.

      5. Sorry Adam, but you wrong, because most alternative medications are only proven by experiences and passed on my word of mouth or books. The only difference is that MMS is only known to be used recently, whereby most other alternatives where known to be used BEFORE pharmaceutic was in the picture.
        But it may also be interesting for you to know, that when I told a friend of mine about MMS, she told me that she knows a herbal medicine lady who was using this method of healing successfully LONG BEFORE it became known as MMS. So we cannot be sure how many others did it before Jim Humble published it. We all know he is not the inventor, just the one who made it widely known. 😛

      6. “most alternative medications are only proven by experiences and passed on my word of mouth”

        Quite. In other words, unproven.

        Some alternative medicines are proven to be effective in clinical trials, such as St John’s Wort for treating depression, and I have no problem with those. But most have no proof.

      7. Adam
        “Quite. In other words, unproven.”
        Old saying but still true is:
        “The proof of the pudding is in the eating. ”
        Many of those ‘unproven’ remedies where proven to work before pharmaceuticals existed simply by their frequent use (cause and effect). Something that does not work, will not be passed on by mouth.

      8. Not true. Plenty of things that don’t work are passed on by mouth. Homeopathy is a good example. That’s very popular, and has been researched extensively, and found to be no better than placebo. People’s opinions can be, and frequently are, wrong. The only way to know is to do a properly controlled clinical trial.

      9. Adam,

        You talk about what’s no better than a placebo, as though the human ability to heal is accidental or a fluke, and that medicine is the only way that healing happens. That is the thinking that dominates the FDA, FSA, and all the other organizations that you consider “credible.” Yet, the medicines that they offer the public are no better than placebos, and oftentimes are worse. Your position here has left no room for no possibility that the “scientific method” could produce such products, or that they would be approved.

        Here’s a article that describes this very scenario:

        Homeopathy is popular for a reason: RESULTS. You say people’s opinions can be, and frequently are wrong. You are a person. Yet, you don’t leave room for the possibility that your position in this conversation is faulty, as the results bare out the efficacy of MMS, in spite of efforts of current medical convention (which you speak for) to denounce it.


      10. Phaelosopher, you mention antidepressants as being no better than placebo. For patients with mild depression, that’s true (although they are effective for more severe depression).

        And how do you think we know that? Because of clinical trials and the scientific method. You can’t have it both ways. You seem to take notice of the scientific method if it supports your view, but ignore it if it doesn’t.

        Antidepressants are just one kind of drug. There are many others that have much greater efficacy, such as proton pump inhibitors. The scientific method allows us to distinguish the useful drugs from the turkeys.

        And there are no “results” about the efficacy of MMS. Just anecdote. If there were “results”, we wouldn’t be having this discussion.

        I certainly leave room for the possibility that I could be wrong. Show me credible, verifiable evidence that MMS is useful, and I will cheerfully admit that I was wrong. On the contrary, it seems to be you who doesn’t leave room the the possibility that you could be wrong. What would convince you that you are wrong and the MMS is in fact worthless and dangerous?

  3. Gilgamesh

    In my opinion, even Francis Bacon would tell you; Dont buy the cow, if you have no idea why you buying it for.

Leave a Comment