MMS: The End… or is it the Beginning?

Jim Humble
Jim Humble wonders what the next step for MMS will be.

Now that the FDA has shown its hand on MMS, it’s now reasonable to wonder what’s next. Is this the end… or is it the beginning? It is a point that, most likely, has been anticipated by Jim Humble, who worked out the protocol for generating chlorine dioxide in levels safe enough to be used inside the human body. Although the FDA, Health Canada, and a host of other government health agencies haven’t looked at them, the results speak for themselves.

History offers many examples of interference, harassment, persecution and prosecution by government agencies of individuals who introduced “alternative” products that actually produced positive results. However, there’s no reason to assume that MMS will be another such story. Jim Humble had the  wisdom to write his story down in his book, The Miracle Mineral Supplement of the 21st Century. His travels included approaching the FDA, which had no interest in MMS, since he was introducing it in Africa. After approaching other agencies that expressed an interest in human health and curing diseases (WHO, Gates Foundation, among others), he made his MMS story public, even making half the book available as a free download. The other half, which talked about how to prepare MMS in volume, was available for a nominal fee. His book has been translated into Spanish, French, and German, with other languages in the works.

While some editors would criticize Humble’s writing style, and some have criticized his interpretation of the chemistry (the aerobic/anaerobic debate), few can ignore the fact that the overwhelming preponderance of results reported by actual MMS users — people who KNOW what they were going through before, and after — has been positive. This should be cause for greater interest and support by the FDA, instead of warnings and dissuasion.

The positive results MMS users have reported stand in stark contrast to the ever more expensive, drastic, and ineffectual results that are being reported by the myriad research organizations that purport to be searching for various “cures” to the mounting list of maladies that the public is experiencing. If all the many billions of dollars have not yet yielded results anywhere near as positive as Humble has instigated via MMS with perhaps a few 10’s of thousands, it is probable that the FDA’s unfavorable stance is more to save face, than to protect the public.

Making MMS
Product is prepared in the kitchen at the first MMS Workshop, Barahona, D.R.

The problem with this tactic is that the public sees the FDA’s bias in favor of the pharmaceutical industry and its patented chemical ways, for what it is. Patenting allows the pharmaceutical companies to “protect” the financial interests of their investors, stockholders, market shares, and other business factors. It also allows them to charge astronomical prices for their drugs, which IS being done, thanks to the insurance industry that collects premiums from the public, and then decides which medications they will pay for. If results are a true indication of intention, then helping the public to recover from illness, or sustain their health, is not actually important. The powers that be don’t seem dissatisfied enough with results to be open to promising alternatives. They can use “bleach” to clean up toxicity or disinfect water on  a large scale, but don’t you do it in scaled down dosage, even though there’s some reason to believe it works.

The public needs to put their money into insurance companies that pay for what has proven to work to the patient’s satisfaction. And while some may be skeptical that this will ever happen, I am not. It must happen, and it will.

What appears to be more important to the FDA and the pharmaceutical industry, is achieving what appears to be medical “relief” without actually fixing the problem. This is why their ads talk about relieving symptoms. If it is to mean anything, truth in advertising would preclude claims that any synthetic pharmaceutical could actually resolve a real medical problem. They cannot. The real problem is that purveyors of the products that actually do help the body repair and heal itself often have to figure out ways not to tell you, so that they won’t incur Inquisition-like scrutiny by the FDA.

This scenario makes the process of healing and recovery a slow one, if it happens at all, more for political reasons than by actual necessity.

Current medical practices do more to maintain the problem and keep the patient an active candidate for the doctor’s visit, for the drugs, and other services, than to help them get well. Even the simple act of administering an antibiotic may fix the problem of the moment (it also may not). However, antibiotics will kill off aerobic microorganisms in the stomach. By not automatically taking steps to replenish this vital group (the anaerobic are important too), an imbalance is then established which can show up as another form of susceptibility somewhere down the line.

Pasteurizing and homogenizing milk is not a medical responsibility per se, but it falls under FDA oversight. This practice kills off aerobic microorganisms and digestive enzymes that would otherwise aid digestion and restore balance (not to mention the real vitamin D that raw milk contains), thus helping maintain or restore health. Yet, raw milk producers are like the bastard children to the dairy industry. They are forced to print warnings on their labels that suggest great harm if the product is ingested, while pasteurized milk producers do not have to warn of the dangers that their products portend. The milk that you buy for $1.99 a gallon at the local supermarket will do real damage, not only for what it is putting in you (including the antibiotics that the cows are given), but for the real nourishment that is not going in. The effects of these practices occur slowly, over time. We don’t see the corporate, industry association, or regulatory culprits that instigate it, and then assume that the problems we encounter are of our own making, “luck” or fate. They are those things, if we do nothing to change our ways.

The public is not against doctor’s visits, if the doctor uses tools that will actually help fix the problem, instead of masking it. That doctor should understand that the body and those microorganisms that reside inside it, not the medications, are the only curing agents in conjunction with the willing patient. The medications and nutrients are all tools to get it done.

MMS is a tool that any doctor that administers antibiotics, treats infections, performs surgery and many chronic conditions, should have readily available. It’s not that it would be used all the time, or exclusively, but if the patient’s condition warrants it. This is what is being frowned upon by the FDA’s ruling; a stance that is likely mirrored by the AMA, and the various journals that tend to influence medical and public thinking, as well as the schools that train future doctors, and the insurance industry that pays for patient claims. None of these groups seem to have noticed that, outside of emergency medicine, their standard, chemical dominated modalities are not working. The practice of giving an anticoagulant, or blood thinner, originally marketed as a rat poison to stroke patients, is one such example. Giving highly poisonous mustard gas to cancer patients in an attempt to “kill” cancer tumors is another. This is a deadly game of medical roulette that may pay well for the doctor and hospital, but sucks for the patient. These practices, initiated several generations ago, have moved beyond all forms of reasonableness, given what we have learned about balance and its role in sustaining or restoring health, and the new science of epigenetics, which looks at overriding factors beyond the genes that can bring about true resolution of medical and life problems.

The way things stand now, most allopathic doctors have become licensed drug pushers. The medications that they administer are antagonistic to normal physiological functions and processes. How can anyone expect to help a patient return to normal (health) by adding new layers of substances that only increase cellular stress?

Given the results that current medical practice and research are delivering, it makes no sense for the FDA to even dare attempt to suppress or dissuade the public from the use of MMS without a benign and conciliatory attempt to confirm and validate the claims. It further makes no sense that they would presume to know what’s in the public’s best interest while having no knowledge of what MMS does, or even inviting people who have benefited from its use to step forward and share. Clearly there’s an opportunity to learn here, if there’s a willingness.

In the meantime, it is incumbent upon the private individual to look out for self and family, since it is clear that the agencies that were established in the public trust, are asleep at the wheel.

——

MMS Training Seminar — Barahona, Dominican Republic (August 9-13, 2010)

Jim Humble at the Workshop
Jim Humble covers MMS intake methods at the first workshop

In light of the official interest in MMS that the FDA has now shown, learning about MMS, what it can do, and how to use it has become even more important, not only for Americans, but for people around the world. Jim Humble has put together, and is offering an intensive, 5-day course on MMS, at the Genesis II Mission, in Barahona, D.R, August 9-13, 2010. As you can see by the photo above, he has learned many ways to facilitate MMS uptake by the body, which should be studied and understood by medical staffs around the world. For more information, you can email: mmsforhispaniola@gmail.com

If you cannot attend, but would like to purchase video of the Seminar (most likely a 6-DVD or more), please email me for more information.

Please follow and like us:

Written by 

Related posts

5 Thoughts to “MMS: The End… or is it the Beginning?”

  1. julz

    I have just bneen told I have shingles…I have MMS and wondered if I sprayed it on infected area…how often and what strength and should I be taking it orally as well…any help would be much appreciated…thank you…doctor gave me pills but I am not a pill taker by nature

  2. JustMe

    Good news is that all the anti-MMS-propaganda are making not only their chummy’s aware, but also those who may need it. Anybody with bad experiences with medication or pharma will think there must be a reason with FDA wants it banned, which will make them only more determent to find out about it.
    So you nay say, bad publicity is better then none and the bullies are shooting them-self in their feet.

    1. ron

      I am seeing some strange statements: My cousin was cured of stage 4 cancer in a little over three weeks and his health restored in another month and the cancer being gone was authenticated by his doctor. I am no expert in any sense of the word but i am intelligent enough to know what i see.

  3. Terri

    I know from first hand MMS works. I had shingles and when I went to fill a perscription for an anti-viral drug and steroid perscribed by my doctor, the store happened to out of one of them. It also was going to cost me $75.00 for each one even with medical insurance (both having severe side effects, by the way). I decided to try the MMS instead and it worked, of course. I’m doing all I can to raise funds so I can attend one of the next seminars. Excellent editorial.

  4. Excellent article.
    I especially like this statement —
    “While some editors would criticize Humble’s writing style, and some have criticized his interpretation of the chemistry (the aerobic/anaerobic debate), few can ignore the fact that the overwhelming preponderance of results reported by actual MMS users — people who KNOW what they were going through before, and after — has been positive.” —
    I can absolutely attest to this. I have never seen any product that has been so universally beneficial to so many applications.
    Keep up the good work.
    Steve

Leave a Comment