MMS: Now I’m a Trojan Horse

MMS: Now I’m a Trojan Horse

The story of Jim Humble’s MMS, or “Miracle Mineral Supplement,” which he made infamous in the eyes and gunsights of the FDA, continues to evolve, and apparently, my voice still has some influence, however small my audience may be.

A couple of days ago, Jim Humble wrote the following reply in the comments from my article, Rethinking MMS: A Cell’s Eye View,” which was published in October, 2012. Instead of addressing his points in the comment thread, I feel that it best be done here.

My inclination was to present it in its entirety and summarize at the end, but that is impractical. I re-read the article in question that engendered the response below. I’ll comment as they come to me:

JH: Adam Abraham was what I thought a super Guy. He wrote super articles about the establishment and dozens if not hundreds of other things telling both what was right and what was wrong. In my opinion he was mostly right. He wrote a number of good reports about MMS and Jim Humble. But now I am not so sure. You know the old story about the Trojan horse. It was a beautiful large statue of a horse left standing outside of a Greek City, on wheels even. The Greeks came out and rolled the horse inside closing the city door thinking they were safe. And then that night in the dark a door opened in the belly of the statue and the enemy came out. They opened the gates from the inside of the city which brought destruction to the city.

I find it rather melodramatic to even infer that my actions, either by intent, or effect, might “destroy” the “city” that is MMS. However, it is also illustrative of the problem at hand. Even in your analogy you’ve got the story backwards. The city where the horse was left, was Troy, which had been at war with Greece for 10 years. It was the Greeks, seeking to end the war, who left the horse. The soldiers inside opened the gates to the city and let the army in. (Source: Wikipedia)

The issue here is fact checking. Before I write and publish anything, I do my best to check the facts regarding what is being communicated, and cite them if and where possible. This helps deepen my own understanding, and that of my readers.

JH: Well that story has happened with MMS and it took me by surprise. Adam Abraham was I thought my friend. I paid his airplane ticket to Europe and several places and he made acceptable Videos about me and MMS and he sold those videos to the public although I don’t know how many, my group also bought them from him and sold them to the public.

I have written over 100 articles on MMS. All free. No book to sell, although there is enough for several. I did it, not because Jim Humble approved or disapproved of them,  but because the subject and the product was/is that important to know and understand. I’ve done it in spite of struggles to make financial ends meet.

Jim did indeed cover my travel expenses to the Dominican Republic for the first and third MMS workshops (to shoot video), and on a trip to Amsterdam, where he spoke at the Nexus Conference (2010), and headed an MMS workshop in Germany the next day, but this hardly equates to the energy that I have put out on behalf of consumer understanding of MMS on my own.

I shot, produced and sold my documentary on MMS, but this hasn’t resulted in any personal financial enrichment. Someone took the video and put it on YouTube. I didn’t oppose it. I was surprised to see that the people who put on the Nexus Conference in Amsterdam, were selling my MMS DVD, but hadn’t purchased any from me in quite some time at that point, or since then. Same thing happened in Australia. A few initial sales, then zero. At the wholesale price I charged your organization Jim, you made twice as much on my DVD as I did.

JH: Then all of a sudden out of a clear blue sky comes various articles and I assume radio programs by Adam and his new friend, Grant, whom he believes to be a super non-degreed chemist.

You shouldn’t assume things you don’t know Jim. Not only about whether I produced “negative” radio programs, or whether Grant’s knowledge of chemistry is substandard simply because he doesn’t have a degree.

I have met too many “degreed” people who don’t have a clue about anything that their professors and institutions told them to steer away from. Worse than not having a clue, they are biased against the “unknown” or “unapproved” subject. You should know a thing or two about that.

Society is being poisoned to this very day by mostly the work of “degreed” people who do what they’re told. Yet, they’d bristle at the thought that they have become like automatons.

Grant introduced me to specific areas of research, also performed by degreed people in laboratories, that supported everything he said about the chemistry of the chlorine dioxide anion (ClO2-) that is produced when a few drops of MMS are “activated.”

JH: The articles explained how the theory of MMS is all wrong and thus MMS could even be harmful.

I’m sorry you took this tact and came to this conclusion. At NO point did I, or Grant, suggest that MMS is either “wrong,” and certainly not ALL wrong, much less harmful. The chemistry and history does tell us that sodium chlorate (NaClO3) in the source material should be avoided. Evidence shows that, in general, the chlorate presence is negligible at best, and that MMS suppliers were conscientious about this factor.

JH: There are no records anywhere of harm that MMS could have done, and with hundreds of pharmaceutical drugs causing hundreds of thousands of deaths each year they have decided it is their job to inform the public of the possible harm that MMS might do.

You are writing as though I’m not aware of this history. Even more so, you’re writing as though I don’t agree with it.

JH: Did you see the contrast there.

Of course I do… the question is, why don’t you see my continued support for both you and the work that you’ve done?

JH: Pharmaceutical drugs cause many deaths, including even aspirin caused more than 300 deaths last year, and MMS no death in 15 years and not even some sort of permanent damage, not one and these guys decide they must warn the public of a possible problem that MMS might cause.

A properly informed public is the best protection, not only for the public itself, but for MMS. You may not think it wise to “upset the apple cart,” but it’s already upset, by persisting in not differentiating the species of chlorine dioxide (ClO2 @ 1.5V) that is produced by the MMS recipe, and suggesting that the stabilized chlorine dioxide anion (ClO2– @ 0.954V) is the same thing. The molecules are the same. The electron count and spin, are different, as is the behavior.

JH: Of course there is the one death that occurred near an island near Australia that was in question for a while, but not now. The FDA and other involved evil groups were able to keep the autopsy held up for over a year from being released, because of course, the autopsy proved that the death could not be MMS caused. Meanwhile they got a year of mileage talking about it and saying it was MMS. Finally they had to quit saying it, but no one apologized for saying it.

A person who understood their friend, and what they had mutually experienced, would have saved their energy with what you wrote above. You’d KNOW this was meaningless… just my opinion. I’ve written about all of this because I witnessed it too.

JH: Then when I sent emails to, Adam and his friend Grant, saying that it seemed like that we should tell the people the facts, but we should tell them so they don’t get all upset and decide against using MMS. I offered to help them get the data to the public. You should understand that I am not now and was not then selling MMS. I make no money from it and never did. I just wanted to see people get well. What I explained to Adam was lets tell people the risk which I estimated to be one in one thousand at that time. Well they completely ignored me.

Risk is never infinitesimal or great. It’s always “50:50.” Something will either impact the experiencer, or it won’t. Whether it impacts a person or not depends on the person, more so than any other factor.

JH: I know that there were some who chose not to use MMS because of what Adam and his friend wrote, I know because those who suffered called me. So there were people who went on suffering because of Adam’s and his friend’s handling of the “Truth.”

I got over guilt trips a long time ago Jim, even before meeting you. They are unbecoming. People don’t suffer because of how “I” handle the truth. They suffer because of how they choose to handle it. You are not responsible for any suffering that I may have gone through any more than I am responsible for yours. It would be silly for me to suggest such a thing. Why are you trying to infer such a thing on me?

JH: When I wrote an article about it Grant got mean about it and said I wasn’t the discoverer. Evidently according to him the fact I brought it to the public meant nothing. And I said in my book it was not my original discovery. But I have also said because I discovered it independently the world has it. I was the second discoverer. So what? The world has it now and didn’t have it before.

This too, is water under the bridge. Your contribution is known and respected here; has always been. Why should you care what Grant had to say, when you know what you’ve done, where you’ve been, and what has happened?

JH: Grant said why should he ask my permission to tell the truth. There is a point there. But all I was asking was let’s tell it so it doesn’t scare people away from MMS.

Jim, if a person maintains their fear, they’ve gained nothing. They’ll move from one “remedy” to another, still afraid. If truth is always going to be subject to editing and modification “for fear of” some unwanted reaction, nothing positive would ever get done.

How many people are not telling you the truth, “for fear of” you throwing them under the bus with excommunication or some other public verbal flogging? Is that what you started your church to do? Use people until they did something you disagreed with, and then publicly chastise them? Do you think that practice is getting you more “converts?” If so, what would the draw be?

Grant introduced me to credible, independent, verified, and corroborated information. He didn’t ask me to believe it because he told me so, which I wouldn’t have done anyway, as I didn’t believe you simply because you said MMS worked as it does. I followed through and checked for myself.

I never asked you for permission to write what I did. I didn’t ask you if it was correct. I checked my own facts. That’s what anyone who wants to understand a subject is going to need to do; give their own energy to developing their own understanding. It doesn’t mean we’re always going to agree on the details, but if your cause is legitimate, then you, your organization, and all who champion the use of MMS will welcome refinements of understanding, even if they didn’t come from you. They should honor (as in respect, not worship) you, which is the only way you’ve been treated here.

JH: After all even if the contention they expound is true it is still hundreds of times less likely to cause harm than Chemo therapy or radiation.

You’re not in a position to make that rationalization. You and your position sit “on the outside” (of the United States). You’re asking people who are “on the inside,” such as Daniel Smith, to stand up for what you are saying is “true.” Now he’s “doing battle” with the system that wants to make an example out of him. Would you come here to support him?

Is being “right” about chlorine dioxide that important to you when there is AMPLE evidence that (1) chlorine dioxide can be dangerous, and (2) the MMS activation recipe produces a species of chlorine dioxide (ClO2) that converts so fast to chlorine dioxide anion (ClO2-) that the user is actually not exposed to the free radical?

Just my opinion, but if you continue to claim that “chlorine dioxide” was “killing the bad pathogens”, then the full adoption of MMS is going to get hammered. This doesn’t mean that it’ll go away. Just that the people who really ought to use it liberally, i.e., trained healthcare professionals, are unlikely to in any significant numbers. I’m happy to be wrong on this.

And while I’m talking about health care professionals, I’ll remind you of a suggestion I made to you several years ago, when you were inspired to start your church and recruit Health Ministers. Anyone who took your course and went out on a field trip for to treat a handful of people for a day or two would became a Health Minister.

I suggested that after training, they should administer MMS to 1,000 people, then give them the title “Doctor of MMS” (DMMS), something like that, since we are so enamored with acronyms. The idea here is that there should be a deep understanding about bio-physiology that comes, not only from head learning, but life experience. There should be no rush to “entitlement.” Needless to say, the suggestion wasn’t adopted.

MMS is but one of many available, viable remedies, a fact that has taken me several years to learn and appreciate. Some, like conscious breathing exercises, don’t cost a penny.

A Health Minister should know MMS, but more importantly, he or she should know the psyche and spirit of the person they’re trying to help. This applies to all who would genuinely help others, conventional health care practitioners included, and is not beyond the purview of MMS treatment. Unfortunately, we’ve become so accustomed to “specialization” that we spin these myopic views as an “advantage,” all the while never knowing or even studying relevant information that could change everything.

So you must ask yourself whether you keep the story of MMS as it is, in spite of credible, demonstrable, reasonable doubt evidence to the contrary, and let Daniel “fall on the sword” instead? What is the harm in embracing the science that preceded it? You are still the originator of this view. You still took MMS from the antiseptic halls of medicine and encouraged people to act on their own behalf. That is a great step in the right direction, but they can’t move forward with the mistaken belief that “only MMS” can help them.

You talk about “friendship” in past tense, because I kept hold of my mind, ability to form my own opinions, and state them, even if they differed from yours. Jim, that’s being a friend, even now. A friend is happy with life, free in their love, and truth. Look around you and see how many happy, truth sharing people do you keep near you? It’s not enough to say the truth. Can you listen too?

Few people seem to notice, or take umbrage with how opinion and behavior changes when money is placed in prime position in the matrix.

Grant certainly didn’t do what he did for money. He did it out of respect for you and to spread the benefit that he has experienced by using MMS. And yet, he wants people to know the whole picture, the “pros” and potential “cons,” so they can get the best out of their MMS experience.

So yes, he bristles when talk of taking MMS with Pepsi or baking soda is mentioned, because he knows the effect that the chemicals will have on molecule size and cellular absorbability. We are so accustomed to the chemicals and so indifferent to the effect that they have on us that we include the problem in the apparent solution, creating bigger problems. It’s not a knock on you, it includes me; it’s virtually everyone in this society. How do we change it? By doing better when we KNOW better.

JH: But no, they decided to tell the truth regardless who it hurt.

Truth known, but untold is the only one that “hurts.” The same applies to truth known but ignored. Just look at the FDA, and how disinterested they’ve been in hearing anything positive about MMS. They want to prosecute this case based on their mandate of:

  1. what constitutes a “drug,” and
  2. the healing qualities of said drug

They persist in doing so, and the public, many of whom are “degreed” individuals from “prestigious” universities, continue to look the other way, not holding them accountable for their absolutely farcical “laws.”

Pharma’s own “police force.”

No synthetic drug can “cure” any human disease, and yet, the FDA is unlikely to give their “approval” any safe, effective, organic chemical compounds, of which MMS is but one example.

JH: But I doubted what they were saying was the truth. I doubted that MMS could cause harm. So I asked Bishop Andreas Kalcker our research director in Spain to check it out. Well he doubted that their contention was right as well, but to be sure he run it by several other scientists in two universities, and guess what, Grant and Adam’s complex explanation doesn’t fly with Andreas and quite a number of other scientists who are now doing research on MMS.

I’m no longer impressed by opinion, even if it is a collective one. The number of scientists that still insist that MMS is a bleach would likely dwarf the group you and Andreas have put together. If any of them have an issue with what we’ve described, let them inform the public themselves. Or is it that they only speak when someone is paying for their opinion? How reliable is that?

JH: MMS, Chlorine Dioxide is one of the simplest formulas you have ever seen, ClO2. That’s it, just chlorine and oxygen, nothing more. But it is one of the hardest formulas to understand and any university will tell you that science still does not understand all of the chemistry of this formula.

If this is true Jim, then they’re not in a position to dismiss another interpretation of what is going on, and neither are you.

JH: But the actual chemistry and truth of it is that thousands of lives have been save and tremendous suffering stopped. But do you see the Trojan Horse effect?

No. Since I have not advised anyone against taking MMS, and have in fact stated a deeper respect for it. I can’t say that I agree with your analogy or conclusion.

JH: Adam came in and said a lot of nice things about MMS and then when he had thousands of people’s attention and trust about MMS turned around said it might hurt them. He explained that he finally understands chlorine dioxide and that he realizes it might hurt them.

Every cell is a Popeye needing the right food.

If you care about your own credibility Jim, I’d suggest that you re-read what I wrote. With Grant’s help, I gave another interpretation of what MMS did, which didn’t follow the “good bacteria/bad bacteria” paradigm. Instead of “heroes and villains,” we gave spinach (ClO2-), not bullets (ClO2) to Popeye the Cellular Man. Newly energized, he was able, once again, to fend for himself.

JH: In this case they brought the darkness to those who believed them. Why wouldn’t the people believe? They already trusted them.

Where was the darkness Jim? Was it “dark” because you didn’t see, say, or believe it? And what do you think is happening to you? You think that your Star Wars analogy, where chlorine dioxide is blowing holes in the sides of “bad” pathogens, represents “the Light?”

JH: Basically the problem is this, Adam and Grant claim that the oxidation potential of the chlorine dioxide ion is too high and causes damage in the body.

No Jim. You claim that any oxidation potential that is higher than 1.1 to 1.4V is likely to damage healthy cells, which actually makes sense.

JH: They claim that the 0.95 volts that we talk about is wrong.

Not so. I wrote specifically that this voltage happens after the first electron exchange, when chlorine dioxide (ClO2) becomes the stabilized and therapeutically beneficial chlorine dioxide anion (ClO2-).

JH: They claim that the actual oxidation potential of the active chlorine dioxide ion is 1.49 volts and thus does damage when released in the body. But not so, as you will see below. The potential is 0.95 volts in the Chlorine Dioxide formula and cannot be otherwise, unless you change the pH of the body. In order to have a 1.49 volt oxidation potential you must have a pH of 3 in the body.

The only molecule that has an oxidation potential of 0.95V is ClO2-. That molecule is electron reduced, stabilized chlorine dioxide, or the chlorine dioxide anion.

JH: So about 6 months ago I sent Adam a reasoning letter attempting to show him some logic. Since one of Adam-Grant’s contentions is that it really isn’t the chlorine dioxide that is killing the pathogens, but rather the sodium chlorite, since according to their chemistry the chlorine dioxide turns back into sodium chlorite in the body and the chlorite runs through the body killing the pathogens.

Jim, you’re making things up here… or at least not communicating what I have written.

This isn’t “my” chemistry or Grant’s. When ClO2 exchanges the first electron, it becomes ClO2-. The acid has taken its pH down, but it is still paired with a chloride ion. It doesn’t become “sodium chlorite.”

For cellular health, chloride must be inside too.

The chlorite ion is now absorbable by the cell, both as organic sodium chloride (NaCl), and as chlorine dioxide anion (ClO2-). Cells need oxygen and chloride ions, and a multitude of synthetic chemicals that are ingested daily literally bind up the available oxygen (due to hydrocarbons in their molecular chains), making the oxygen no longer bioavailable. (See membrane potential.)

You can imagine all the “good guys” vanquishing the “bad guys” until the cows come home, but unless both chloride and oxygen ions get into cells, to jump-start the Krebs Cycle, not much healing is going to happen. ATP is one byproduct of a healthy Krebs Cycle. Healing is another. This isn’t Adam or Grant talking. It’s basic cellular physiology. It is possible things have changed, but this wasn’t taught in the two Health Minister classes that I attended.

JH: I pointed out that sodium chlorite had been on the health food store shelves for 80 years throughout the US and literally hundreds of thousands of people had taken it without the results we get from MMS. Sodium chlorite gets a little bit of results now and then, but never the result that MMS does. Adam was totally disinterested in anything I had to say and wouldn’t discuss it.

I was disinterested in being told what was so by someone who didn’t feel it necessary to also listen. You weren’t alone there. On several occasions when he called me to “set me straight,” Ron Neer also wanted to tell me where we were “wrong,” and assume much about what we did, and did not understand, without ever having an interest in learning what led to the evolution in our thinking.

Even now, you’re choosing to see my actions as an attack against you and MMS, even though my support has not wavered. I simply have no desire, nor need to “convince” you or anyone else about what is true. I’m not presuming that I have all the answers either. However, all parties in a mature conversation must be willing to exchange thoughts, being equally willing to be receptive as well as giving. This is how knowledge is spread. You can’t judge a book by the cover… well you can, but then you’d get what we have now. I’ve had enough of that already.

We’re all giving our best guess, even the FDA is making up a grand fairy tale, and facilitating a massive degeneration of human health in the process. Nothing that either you or I am doing can compare to what has been, and is still being done by them. The way to change things is for people to KNOW the truth themselves. If my truth makes better sense to me than yours, then I’m going to go with it. I’m not forcing anyone else to follow. If my understanding changes, then it is my responsibility to share what I have learned, and why it is relevant now. That’s what I’ve done.

I am not against learning something new; in fact, I love learning. However, with all due respect, no one is above gaining better understanding, even you.

JH: Below is the truth of the formula as close as we can get by several scientists –true — degreed — scientists and it shouldn’t have to be proven as the formula required is a well-known chemical formula that can be easily proven and is given in 365,000 places on the internet. You see, chemistry is chemistry and certain formulas work for all chemicals, not just a select few.

This is it from Dr.Andreas Kalcker:

AK: Yes there is a potential of 1.5Volt as they state but: only if you apply the Nernst equation p. e.

AK: [the Nernst equation is a known equation that relates the equilibrium reduction potential of a half-cell in an electrochemical cell (which is what the body is) ]

AK: The Nernst Equation:
ClO2– + 2H2O + 4e-↔ Cl- + 4OH-Eº ≈ 1.409v

AK: that means simply ClO2 has 1.5V with pH 3. and 0.954 V with pH 7.

AK: we do not have pH3 in the body ! period! in our body we have: ClO2 + 1e-↔ ClO2 – Eo = 0.954V.

Andreas attempted to “correct” me with this same admonishment, but if a pH of 3 doesn’t exist in the body, then please tell me how food gets digested. Basically, he’s saying just what I’ve stated here, and found in other publications, such as the EPA Guidance on Chlorine Dioxide.

Their equation is as follows:  ClO2(aq) + e- = ClO2– E° = 0.954V [In other words,  ClO2 in an aqueous solution, receives an electron (e-) becomes ClO2– which has an electrical potential of 0.954V.]

The fact is that when ClO2 is at 1.5V, it is unstable, and is the so-called, “free radical” that your (FDA) “mother” warned you about. That is chlorine dioxide. When it is 0.954V, it is the chlorine dioxide anion (ClO2-), same molecule, different biochemical behavior, different emission spectroscopic signature, and different biophysical results.

AK: Any acidic pathogen receives even a higher discharge as 0.95V due to this condition!

I don’t know what he meant here. The exclamation point didn’t make it any clearer.

AK: The problems that are true that they see are probably due to the Citric acid:

1. 50% is too strong
2. it has traces of aspergillus niger ( mold)
3. it feeds Citrobacter

Dr. Andreas Ludwig Kalcker (Ph.D)

JH: That’s it, it’s really simple. Anyone can look up the entire formula and chemical reactions on the internet. Start at Wikipedia, check it carefully, take it to a chemistry professor at a University.

I did Jim. Your interpretation isn’t the only one. That same chemical information was and is available to the folk who claim MMS is “bleach,” including the FDA. Quite a few “PhD’s” working for them too.

JH: The problem that Adam Abraham and Grant claim exists is really rather childish and would smack of someone being paid to throw confusion into the question. After all, every cancer patient they convince to not use MMS is worth 800,000 dollars to the medical industry.

This is almost funny… but it’s not.

JH: But the really crazy part is, hundreds of thousands of sufferers have benefitted and there are simply no recorded deaths or permanent damage claims made. If their story had of been the truth they wouldn’t have refused to discuss it with me.

I have no desire, nor need to argue a point with someone not willing to listen, even if considering the point would help their stated mission. The FDA says that they’re moved by the call to “protect” the nation’s health, but their actions are doing the opposite.

You try to equate my actions to that of a Trojan Horse, yet you’re doing the same thing that your real enemy, which is the status quo, are doing; considering any position other than one you originated or endorsed, to be “wrong,” with you as the sole arbiter of what is “right.”

I don’t need to be “right.” If I come to an understanding that takes me beyond what I understood, then I’m okay with going there. If others want to stay where they are, it’s okay by me.

I don’t need to “prove” that my intention is to help people, since that is all that I’ve done as it relates to MMS.

JH: The opposite of where there is smoke there is fire is that where there is smoke there should be some sort of fire. The fire in this case would be people who have been damaged by the bad MMS. After all about 10 million people have tried MMS and thousands of success stories are around the internet. Your chances of being damaged by MMS are so remote as not to really be a problem even it it were true. Grant’s warnings only scare people but have saved no one.

All you or anyone else had to do was to reassure people that sodium chlorate is not in the MMS material.

That same EPA Guidance made the following statement:

One of the most undesirable byproducts in generators is the chlorate ion (ClO3-).

At least one of the MMS suppliers had gone to specific lengths to ensure that his source sodium chlorite material was free of any chlorate before I knew anything about this. He figured something out and made sure his product was above reproach. Is it such a big deal to officially support this position? It’s in perfect alignment with your description of the contents of the raw 80% sodium chlorite. I’ve never seen you mention sodium chlorate at all. Therefore, you aren’t teaching that it is present, you’re simply acting like it’s no big deal, when it is. MMS users aren’t in any danger by the teachings you’ve presented. They simply need to be more precise in moving forward if  greater adoption is ever going to happen.

JH: My decency suggestion is that if Grant really believes what he is saying he should start selling the really good stuff. Since it isn’t available anywhere else, it would only be decent when you scare someone away from a product that might save their lives, YOU AT LEAST PROVIDE A PLACE TO BUY THE ALTERNATE. Ever wonder why he doesn’t. He can’t say he doesn’t want to compete with me as I have never sold it. I’ve never made a cent from the sales of MMS.

Bill Clinton said he “never had sex with that woman” too. The mere claim of money not made raises questions of concern, legitimate or not, about money made. You don’t have to defend your record or motives regarding money to me, except if you think you need to. I don’t really care.

JH: My money which is little comes from seminars and books. So I wouldn’t take the chance if there were bad things wrong with MMS as all I have ever wanted was to see people get well and overcome their suffering.

I believe you Jim. You’re not alone, but in my opinion, you’re alienating yourself and painting MMS in a corner. MMS use will grow through greater understanding, not by a few people, but by all.

JH: For some years now I have had the backup of scientists and professors from several universities who do continuous research on the use of chlorine dioxide for the purpose of overcoming disease.

If so, then they should freely offer their opinion so as to allay any misconceptions that might arise. If so, then my musings would be meaningless. If so, you’d have many independent links to cite, just as I have cited numerous references in each article that I’ve written.

I’ve not asked people to rely on my word, or on Grant’s. I’ve pointed them to the places I’ve gone, to read for themselves, the material that I’ve read, so that they can form their own opinions, and follow their own guidance of what is best for them.

If what you say is so about MMS, then you won’t be the only one saying it. Everything that I’ve written about the chlorine dioxide anion was synthesized from research papers and scientific data. Also, our research material should be appropriate to the intended use. In other words, instead of talking about the industrial, commercial, and inanimate use of chlorine dioxide, the science described will be for the intended application, i.e., inside a living human body, with its specific environment, dynamics, and needs. I’ve done that, with Grant’s help.

JH: I apologize for being overly irritated about scaring people away from MMS. I truly only expected that from FDA, pharmacies, and medial doctors. But I am still willing to discuss it with Grant. Maybe I am wrong about his actions.

Archbishop Jim Humble

If I have done anything by writing what I have, it is to communicate in a way that makes sense to people. Believe it or not Jim, some of the explanations that you give don’t make sense. This is easy to overlook if one achieves the desired results, which MMS has certainly earned, for which your tireless work should be commended. As such, you earned what we might call, a “grace period,” and rightfully so.

As the numbers grow, and more people take a critical look at MMS, some of your “scientific” explanations break down, which give folk who are not interested in positive results fodder to criticize and ridicule the product and the man. If I’m a “Trojan Horse,” please show me where I have done such things.

If MMS acceptance is to grow, then it must stand up to all critical observation. Critical observation is not criticism. It is close scrutiny. There are many more factors involved in the genesis of diseases than microbial “pathogens,” or pH, which are effects, and not cause. They include:

  • chemical additives in food,
  • the chemical nature of medicine,
  • chemical treatment and delivery of denatured water,
  • toxic electromagnetic fields in our homes and places of work,
  • noxious atmosphere,
  • our generally isolated and ungrounded bio-electrical state, and
  • toxic (fearful) thinking (sense of powerlessness, victimhood, etc.)
  • our general unawareness of self (probably the most important)

MMS can address some issues, such as heavy metal toxicity, transient viral and bacterial issues, but not all. If a person gags at the thought of taking more, then that’s a sign they should let up for a time, not that MMS itself is ineffective.

MMS won’t make a courageous person out of a fearful one, or a smart person out of one that has not valued knowledge. What would they be courageous or knowledgeable about? Knowing more ways to restore balance and taking responsibility for their choices in life, not expecting someone or something else to “fix” their problems, and complaining or whining when they don’t get well as quickly as it takes to buy a Big Mac.

Human beings are a wonderful, curiously amazing species that has been lied to repeatedly, continuously, throughout the ages. They’re being fed lies now, coming from every direction, from people and institutions they have been led to believe they could trust. They have taken many of these lies, presented by trusted sources, to be “truths.”

That’s why the FDA can FABRICATE what they suggest to be “laws” that say “only drugs can cure,” and if anything is deemed to be “curative,” it is a “drug.” Neither of these statements are true, even if the FDA says it’s so. In other words, both are lies. Yet, in the spirit of the emperor that had no clothes, many fearful, degreed people are acting as though these lies are true, and “enforcing” them, mostly without our knowledge or consent, down our throats.

Just some of their tools include:

  • vaccines
  • flu shots
  • GMO manipulation of food
  • atmospheric geo-engineering (chemtrails)
  • HeLa cell propagation

You’ve garnered the attention of “the Emperor,” and your story is going to need to hold up. MMS has been mis-characterized as an “industrial bleach,” and highly dangerous by a medical institution that approves giving battery acid to cancer patients and calling it “chemotherapy.” When the trusting patients die, the disease and “naughty tumor” gets the blame. The denaturing orthodoxies of “modern day living” continue on as if nothing was wrong.

As I have written on numerous occasions, MMS should be part of the physician’s “tool box.” It is a far superior remedy for many of the conditions that ail a human… or animal or plant, than the swill sick people are being prescribed by a pharmaceutically controlled medical profession.

Perhaps you only see MMS being adopted by a small group of followers, and never by the medical establishment. Well, keep telling people about “good” bacteria and “bad” bacteria. If anaerobic bacteria didn’t exist, the body wouldn’t survive the chemicals we’ve grown to think are superior to Nature. All life, including viruses, bacteria, cysts, and tumors, are RESPONSES to the non-living, unconscious, disruptive chemical SUBSTITUTES that we have embraced as part of “modern life.”

MMS can help, but nothing can stand as a substitute for one’s own awakening to the realization that life, love, and living are not their “enemies,” and that they have a great partner in health, not only in nature, but within each cell of the human body.

Related posts

0 thoughts on “MMS: Now I’m a Trojan Horse

  1. I’d like to know, too, Adam. I’m just now setting up mine and want to make sure it’s on a good server. Thanks for your help!

  2. This will be my last post on this blog. I intend to not spend my time with it. We now have 850 trained Ministers of Health in 95 different countries of the world who know and can use MMS and who are using MMS to treat people and help restore their health. They charge nothing but ask for a donation after the people are well. These people all paid for their training and most of them paid to travel thousands of miles to come for their training because they wanted to help people. More than 5 million people had downloaded my free first book by 5 years ago. Hundreds of thousands of lives saved. More than 15 million people have used MMS.

    The reason I will never be back to this blog is because I find that 50% of the people here approve of telling the truth in the manner that Adam and Grant have done to scare a number of people who suffer away from MMS. There are ways of telling the truth without scaring people especially scaring those who suffer. But it seems that the majority here feels that is fine. Well let me tell you something. Our research has found a number of new “truths” and a couple of completely new MMSes that are improved over the success we already have and I have discovered one new MMS personally as well.


    Go to any good university and talk to the chemistry professor and you will find that science does not yet completely understand the chlorine dioxide, sodium chlorite chemistry yet. I put up what I consider a reasonable explanation. I don’t expect it to prove totally the truth, but then neither do I expect Grants or Adams to prove to be the total truth either. But from where I set I have a better chance of finding the truth than Grant or Adam. In the first place, I see hundreds and thousands of people cured of various diseases a often many in one day. On top of that I have several people with high degrees in Chemistry and physics helping me with the theory who also have access to many who are healed. We use MMS to lead people to recover their health every day now.

    All I have seen is Adam and Grant present the “truth” so that there are those who walk away from something that could overcome their suffering. That is the sum total of what I object when it come right down to it. Does anyone see the difference. One is responsible for thousands of recoveries to health, and the other is responsible for presenting their truth so that some people will continue to suffer. The Churches new technology is so far beyond Adam and Grant that it isn’t even funny. So they can learn about it in my new book when it comes out in several months. The general gist of things on this blog is that Jim Humble is wrong. Well I would rather be wrong and have helped thousands to return to health and be right and have scared suffering people away from a cure.

    Adam and a number of newbies like to get on and go on and on about my church. Well that church is responsible for saving hundreds of thousands of lives and these people like to tell me how it is wrong. Probably they have never helped a single soul back to health, but they sure know what is wrong with my church who does. The church organizes a bunch of people into doing something instead of setting back and hoping something will get done. Anybody who can do something by their selves are invited to do so. But it just amazes me that new people will come in and decide they know what is wrong. There are many who also come in and start telling me what is right. But you know it doesn’t matter what I do or how I do it, there are blogs and critics who really hate me and quite a few of them, which tells me one thing I am succeeding as no one bothers to criticize the failures. If I were failing not one would be jealous and spend time being critical.

    1. grant

      Mr. Humble. I am not your enemy. I have NEVER been your enemy. I have NEVER attacked your Church or you. Go back through ALL YOUTUBE (and other) postings published by me, and you won`t find one sentence attacking the Chlorite Matrix. Consistently, I have stated that in order TO MAKE A FORM OF MMS THAT WON`T BE INSTANTLY ATTACKED BY THE ASSCLOWNS IN THE FDA, you will need to use-create PURE BASE PRODUCTS!

      BUT… I have most certainly been attacked by you. Remember your comment stating that I should have first consulted with YOU before I TOLD THE BLOODY TRUTH about the importance of pure ingredients. The FACT IS, I truly did try to have a dialogue with you. BUT…some assclown on your end deleted my email attempts.

      Think back to the beginning of MMS on US soil, then ask yourself this question. IF YOU HAD KNOWN about the Sarin et al Chlorite Matrix AND the Kuhne WF10, would you still have made the MMS with combined Sodium Chlorate and Sodium Chlorite.

      Perhaps your exile would not have occurred, as that is very likely the reason for the MMS to be attacked by the fda.

      1. Grant,

        In the fact that your “Truth” hurts those who suffer does indeed make you an enemy of those people and thus my enemy. You don’t attack the chlorite matrix. So what. Those people who suffered and was scared away from MMS by you is what I have addressed all along. At this point I don’t care if you are right or wrong, I believe you are wrong, but I don’t care.

        You and Adam are screaming “FIRE” in a crowded theater when there is no fire. In 15 years no one has reported trouble from the poison you claim is there. Those people who are believing you don’t have the benefit of your education. I told you from the very beginning that there was better ways to telling the truth, but you only believe you have the truth and you don’t care how many those suffering continue to suffer.

        Sodium chlorate has been tested in a number or places for ingesting an in the quantities we use with MMS the same as MMS it had not proven poisonous.

        You are very naive about the FDA and have no idea what the FDA really does. Months ago when you wrote you said you had the right to tell the truth and I did not discover MMS and thus had no claim to it. You said you did not have to ask me for permission to tell the truth. I, of course, never suggested that you needed to ask me. I suggested that you and Adam tell people in such a manner that it did not scare them. And now probably you say you only scared a few. Well, one person is far too many. If you wanted to, which I doubt you will, but if you wanted too, you could try to overcome some of your damage and rewrite some of your truth so people know they are not risking their health or life when taking MMS. If you don’t want to do that then don’t write articles saying you are not my enemy.

        This goes double for Adam too. He thinks he can say anything and it is of no consequence to anyone, but the fact is, words do more damage in this world than any other thing. What Adam said, that he can say anything and others need not be damage or influence is a totally uncaring and callous statement. Nations are destroyed by words.

        And your followers fit into the same category. Many of them just heard of MMS in the last few months, but they know Jim Humble is wrong and you guys who have done nothing are the ones that are right. I don’t pay any attention to the dozens of critics that run on on on about MMS and Jim because what they say are all lies and my job is saving lives and I don’t have the time to fool with them. But I tried working with you guys because Adam was supposed to be my friend, but it turned out that he is not, and so far as I can see is not the friend of mankind. There are a lot of people out there working on MMS, researching and coming up with new ideas and theories but most do more than sit and think. They work with MMS.

        Finally, no I don’t agree with you about what you say about MMS, but if you create a cheap MMS that fits into your theory, I will certainly test it and present it to a number of scientists for evaluation and if it works and cures people and all that, we will introduce it slowly into the MMS line. You keep talking about basics and all that but a MMS that works still has not even been suggested by you.

  3. Dan


    Let me give you my take an Adam’s article as someone new to the whole MMS world. It may influence your opinion of Adam.

    Less than one month ago, I had never heard of MMS. After my sister-in-law expressed her interest in it, I checked out some information on the internet. I then read your 4th edition book. My interest was tweaked but I did have reservations. I figured it was worth a try, so, I ordered 4oz. of sodium chlorite and 4oz. of 50% acidic acid.

    While waiting for my order to come in, I continued reading on the internet. I was prepared for some skepticism towards MMS. The information that I came across really increased my apprehension in even trying MMS. There are a couple of websites out there that do an excellent job of making MMS, and quite honestly you, look very bad.

    I finally received the MMS last Friday, September 13th, and despite my reservations, decided to try it. I was excited to try it but didn’t know what to expect. I won’t get into the exact details but by Sunday morning I felt like I was getting the cold that my children were fighting, and I was ready to call the whole thing a scam. How could I get a cold in the middle of taking MMS? Whether correct or not, this is the decision that I was approaching.

    I gave up for a couple of days, but at some point I noticed some improvement in my sinuses. Since I spent the money already and figured that if it was a scam that I had already been scammed, I decided to continue with the MMS but reduce the amount that I started taking.

    I continued researching on the internet when I came across Adam’s website and his article. I was initially very impressed with the article and it renewed my interest that there really could be something to MMS. It did not scare me off any more than the little research that I had already done. It did, however, confirm my apprehension towards chlorine dioxide itself. After reading all of the blogs including Grant’s and yours, and Adam’s response to you, it appears that no one knows exactly what is going on.

    I do think that the article takes a big step forward in explaining what is going on. And I think this progress is needed for MMS to advance as a practical therapy. It may present a short term speed bump and may even deter some people from trying it, but in the long run it can only help. If MMS is for real, I think you are getting closer to explaining how it works.

    In my opinion, the damage being done to the advancement of MMS is being done by you. I don’t think you can see it because you are in the middle of everything. Of course, this all assumes that it isn’t a big scam which I’m not totally convinced either way. I can offer an explanation from an outsiders point of view if you’d like.

    At this point, I’m still trying MMS. I think I’m still seeing improvement but it is a roller coaster ride. Yesterday, I did not feel particularly well although not worse than I was initially feeling.

    I want to thank Adam for writing the article, and I hope he continues to pursue his research. It appears Grant has a brilliant mind but is a bit of a loose cannon. He seems set in his findings, but there appears to be a couple pieces in this puzzle missing. I think if he re-opens his mind, he may be the one who can help figure everything out.

    Please feel free to contact me and I can explain some of my point further.


    1. Don Cuthbert

      I heard of chlorine dioxide at the beginning of May 2013, through the work of Kerri Rivera, who has been using it as part of her protocols to successfully recover children from autism. She wrote a book, “Healing the Symptoms Known as Autism”, which was published in May. To date, she has documented 100 children who have recovered from autism to the extent that their ATEC scores have fallen below 10. The ATEC (Autism Treatment Evaluation Checklist) is an accepted and validated means of determining whether any autism treatment one tries is having a beneficial effect or not. Children who are rated 30 or below on this scale are in the top 10 percentile of autism symptoms and can be expected to be able to live a successful, independent life. The lower the score, the better. (My step-son’s ATEC score fell in 3 months, between May and August, from a 53 to a 19 through consuming chlorine dioxide and isotonic ocean water, as well as a slightly stricter diet than he was following already.)

      It turns out that parasite infestations have been discovered to be the source of toxins and other chemicals that cause autistic symptoms. Chlorine dioxide helps to oxidize these toxins and kill the microbes that the larger parasites depend on for survival. Autistic children have consistently been found to have everything from Lyme disease to 40 inch long intestinal worms of various kinds. Weakening and eliminating these parasites is enabling the children to heal and recover from autism.

      I only heard of Jim Humble and MMS because of finding Kerri Rivera. The whole Genesis II Church concept nearly made me give up looking into it any further, but I was intrigued enough by the apparent success Kerri was having with autism to keep looking into it. Honestly, the church idea was much more of a deterrent to my trying MMS than anything Adam or Grant have said. I tried to get past that by assuming it was only done to enable freedom of disseminating information about the use of chlorine dioxide for health in many countries, whose laws were more lenient towards this under the umbrella of a “church” sacrament or doctrine.

      Adam Abraham’s articles were among the many articles, forums, patents and other websites I came across while trying to determine whether chlorine dioxide was safe for my autistic step-son to take. I would say that the information about the chlorite matrix that Grant had brought to the attention of so many, including Adam Abraham, was very encouraging and helped me to feel that consuming chlorine dioxide (or at least the “chlorite matrix”) was safe and could kill microbes, but also had some potentially health-promoting benefits. Of course, when I first mixed up a drop of sodium chlorite and citric acid, I was the first in the family to try drinking it. As it turned out, everyone else in our household of 5 came down with a cold about then. I was the only one not to get sick.

      I have continued to research chlorine dioxide use and kept also watching for mention of “ClO2-” or the chlorite anion since May. We now make a distilled version of “MMS” called CDS (Chlorine Dioxide Solution) by allowing the chlorine dioxide gas to escape from the solution and be slowly absorbed into distilled water, until the distilled water has a measured chlorine dioxide content of 3000 ppm. My step-son now consumes this 3000 ppm CDS at the rate of 7.5ml per dose (diluted to 12 oz with more water for drinking) 10 to 14 times each day. He also has regular enemas, containing a more dilute amount of CDS. (He is almost 17, 6’2″ and 160 lbs). All of my family now bathes in water which has CDS added to it in order to absorb some through our skin. It has become evident that the more CDS we can get into my step-son, the better he is doing and the more his autism symptoms and behaviours are vanishing. He is doing measurably better all the time.

      I have no more than a high school chemistry background, so I have to consider the opinions of experts as to what is going on with making solutions containing chlorine dioxide. It is amazing that so many chemists and researchers and industry experts have somewhat varied opinions on what is going on chemically or biologically when these solutions are created and used. There is some consistency in most of the information out there though. Obviously pure science, properly applied, will ultimately reveal what is true. I think the variation is like looking at two sides of the same coin, without considering the entire coin from all sides.

      From what I have found, Grants assertion that the chlorine dioxide molecule, produced from making “MMS” using pure sodium chlorite, only exists for a moment is in question. I understand that he is basing this on documented research with valid methods. I suspect that this ClO2- anion occurs very quickly when in solution, as proven. However, many patents and industry methods describe the production of chlorine dioxide gas in much the same manner. The fact that one can distill the chlorine dioxide gas from such a reaction to create the CDS that I use daily, illustrates that the chlorine dioxide is not only existing in a transient momentary state as a result of the traditional MMS recipe. Since Grant has provided proof that the ClO2- anion is immediately produced, yet we know that the ClO2 gas can be distilled from such a reaction, I have to conclude that both are true. I imagine that through some process, as these anions escape solution, they end up in the form of ClO2 molecules at that point, because that is what ends up in the CDS.

      Also, when one considers the way chlorine dioxide is reduced ultimately to sodium chloride, etc. in the body, I have seen in many documents that the first step of that reduction produces the ClO2- anion. I do not see how this can support the concept of the “pervasive” nature of chlorine dioxide. Since Grant and Adam have brought to our attention how beneficial this ClO2- anion is to our health, I have no problem consuming something that will produce some of this anion in the body as it is broken down.

      1. grant

        Excellent comment! You provide the commonly accepted views along with personal observations in ways that raise secondary questions. As I have no doubt that your first paragraph is true, I`ll begin with the second.

        You must look to the inclusion of immortal Cell lines in vaccines for your answer to Autism and other childhood neurological issues. Infant receivers of the Vaccines experience immediate and rapidly occurring swelling of the brain. The swelling is actually due to the MASSIVE unnatural increase in brain cell (and other non-human cells) volume which occurs immediately after the Vaccine is criminally delivered. The non-human IMMORTAL CELL lines used in the Vaccines reproduce at rates (mitosis) which dwarf human rates, and that is FACT.

        Now, I`ll F.F. to your final paragraph.

        Chlorine Dioxide,as created and used by the pulping industry, is BEYOND DANGEROUS to living organisms. It carries, as was published in the USEDTOBE EPA TITLE 40, all hazardous goods ratings ever created. Part of those ratings were; Carcinogenic, Mutagenic, and PERVASIVE. Yes, even diluted ClO2 caused cancers in both rodents and Humans. We all know what the term Mutagenic means. Pervavive means that the ClO2 molecule will last, under the right conditions, for up to 300,000 years.

        Remember, the above-warning refers to ClO2 (of sodium chlorate), NOT ClO2-. (of sodium chlorite).

        The Chlorite Matrix IN ANY FORM MADE UP OF PURE SODIUM CHLORITE, PURE WATER, AND PURE MILD ACID, is very beneficial. I would suggest that everyone use the ClO2 NEGATIVE (ClO2-) designation from now on. Help avoid confusion.

    2. grant

      Which parts…specifically speaking…

  4. Adams claim that he is not responsible for the manner in which he delivers the truth to people is stupid and childish. Just like it would be stupid to stand up in a theater and cry, FIRE, FIRE if merely a paper were burning. Any and all people who were killed on the way out of that heater would be the fault of the person calling fire. Well, Adam and Grant have been calling FIRE FIRE for several years now claiming it is the truth and that they thus have the right to holler fire about MMS. But their truth is no more proven than MMS truth and there are some pretty brilliant scientists saying that Grants truth might not be so brilliant after all. Well there are some truths that their theory seems to have missed. I am rewriting my book now to be somewhat more effective with some more “truth”. I don’t like to call it truth, but would rather say newly discovered facts.

    I will tell you one of the ways to discovering some real useful truth about MMS or any other technology is to go do it instead of talk about it. In this case, go out there in the jungle and treat several thousand cases of malaria and Cancer and hepatitis C and several dozen other diseases, then make it fit your lab theories. You haven’t treated or cured anyone. That’s what I did and then when I got back here you guys, Grant and Adam write up discussions on how MMS can be harmful and scare a significant number of people away and then say you are not responsible for their continued suffering because they didn’t take the years to learn what you guys know. Nothing wrong with scaring them. Well let me tell you that’s crazy. Adam can design his own universe in which all those things he says are unimportant are actually unimportant. But in this universe if by your actions, or by your inactions you cause someone to suffer, you can claim that you don’t have a guilty conscious until the cows come home and that still won’t be true. All those people who didn’t try MMS because Adam chose to scare them with his truth are his responsibility and he can tell the crowd that he has no guilty consciousness but that don’t make it so.

    Well anyway, I’m not going to put the data here, but I do have a significant improvement in technology that if Adam and Grant really understood what they are talking about they should have been able to predict. My improvement consists of more than just a theory, it also produces observable results. That chapter they can read out of my book soon as it is published. But the fact is chlorine dioxide does show up in the body along with the sodium chlorite and they change back and forth to a certain extent. But there are scientific instruments that read chlorine dioxide ion by touch and nothing else can create that touch. So what do you do, say that those instruments also don’t know what they are doing.

    All the religions in the world, and thousands of chemists who know about hundreds of different things, and a million mechanics all often think they have the truth and now along comes Grant and Adam so convinced that they know the truth they are willing to have people continue suffering because they have been scared by them. Your truth is your truth and it might be right and might not. But even if it is the truth, that does not give you a license to scare someone who is suffering and who could maybe find relief. I find it extremely reprehensible that you would say that it is alright to scare people with the truth especially since you didn’t at the same time say that there has never been and evidence in the real world of a problem. That using MMS is extremely unlikely to ever cause a problem. I am also amazed at the number of people on this forum who also seem to believe that scaring people is OK.

  5. grant

    (cont)… also, but as with all Chlorite-based cures, it must be created using PURE BASE INGREDIENTS.

    Once again, I am forced to defend myself from attack BECAUSE I TOLD THE TRUTH. Why is that, and how is it possible? After all, I am only the messenger whom brings GOOD NEWS.

    The issue seems to return to the issue of Mr. Humble’s assumption vs, my well researched and republished Chlorite Matrix info. Although there may have been some need to publish an explanation of the MMS workings, Mr. Humble should have considered the potential of future problems. On the Humble side, the mms is thought to target only “pathogens”, and cause their destruction by “exploding” them. Mr. Humble has stated that he used a “dark field” microscope to support that theory. and further states that he witnessed that sort of event. Ok, but how do we know that the attack/damage wasn’t being cause by 1. the microscope itself. 2. Ozone used in the distilled water. 3. KBrO3(PB) caused/produced by adding the Ozone to water. 4. Sodium Chlorate-caused Free Radical (ClO2).

    My description of the method involves partly the WF10 statement and partly my fact-based explanation of the Chlorite Matrix (ClO2-) being taken directly into the cell via the natural function of the Cell’s sodium-potassium pump action. The very small molecule produced by the PURE INGREDIENT-based Chlorite Matrix is an absolute requirement, The ONLY WAY to keep that molecule small, is the use of PURE non-ozone treated water that is combined with the proper amount of PURE sodium chlorite.

    Once the Chlorite Matrix enters the cell, the cell’s water is purified and the virus/virion present are eliminated. Quickly, the Krebs Cycle returns to proper function due to the return of electrical discharge from four Elements targeting specific Voltage-Gated Ion Channels. The return of Immune System function is underway.

  6. grant

    To Mr. Humble, and all others interested in this topic.

    DCA is commented upon in a manner that becomes “he said, she said”, in that the IMPORTANT issues are ignored. Those issues raise questions regarding the actual presence of disease, and the ORIGIN/CAUSE of the disease.

    You all can see where this is going. The DCA origin goes way back to a time when diseases such as Cancer had singular cause. The cause was mold, and it is very clear that the medical grade DCA worked very well to end that cancer form.

    During the DCA use period, another cancer cause called DDT began to be widely used, and massive tonnage of the stuff was used to control insect-born diseases during, and after WWII throughout first Europe, and then the rest of the world. The DDT caused Cancers that the DCA molecule couldn’t cure. Therefore, there was confusion over DCA’s effectiveness. As for side effects, many earlier groups of patients reported little to no side effects.

    So, at this time I must state that there are at least three MODERN types/BASES of cancer. These are (1) Mold, then (2) at least four types of Pesticide/Herbicide/Fungicide molecule-bases that cause cancers, then (3) the HeLa Cell-caused CONTAGIOUS CANCERS. Obviously, if one has a mold-based cancer, the DCA will work very well. As for the DDT-type cancers, the Chlorite Matrix works very well, and that truth is published in Papers in PubMed, Water Research, etc. Now, the BAD NEWS.

    I have extensively researched the criminal use of the Entity which caused the development of IMMORTAL CELL LINES such as the HeLa line and it’s descendents. The Entity in question consistently produces/causes “immortal” lines of CANCER CELLS that are highly contagious due to their unnatural energy state. These contagious cancer-causing cells are AIRBORN, and live in a self-supplied 15 million volt-per-meter field. OF COURSE these cells are airborn. These well-known Entity-supported cell lines began in the 1953 Poliomyelitis Vaccine, and the earliest know two were named HeLa and HL60. The HeLa Line carried the dreaded highly contagious, cancer causing HERPES VIRUS.

    This overview should be sufficient for the average researcher.

    Now, i’ll describe the actual mechanisms used by the various Chlorite Matrix molecules.

    The first one was named “The Chlorite Matrix” by it’s inventors, Sarin et al, and was considered highly effective on several serious issues. That Chlorite Matrix was highly publicized during the mid 80’s as “The Next Aids Cure”, but it was quickly concealed from view. The Sarin et al Chlorite Matrix re-appeared as the “fix” for the Red Cross Tainted Blood scandal, and it was COMPLETELY successful.

    So, what have I said so far?

    DCA, IN IT’S ORIGINAL PURE FORM, has proven highly effective when used on MOLD-BASED CANCERS. DCA will not work like the MMS or the Chlorite Matrix because it’s molecule is far too large (and carries the wrong charge state) to enter the cell via the Sodium-Potassium Pump.

    The Chlorite Matrix (AND HUMBLE’S MMS) are highly effect if created using PURE BASE PRODUCT. If the Health issue is brought by complex molecules such as used in DDT, these SINGLE-ACID molecules aren’t very effective.

    The most effective version of the Chlorite Matrix is named WF10. Five mild acids are used, and then Sodium Perborate is added. People, WF10 is HIGHLY EFFECTIVE.

    Enough for tonight. I will complete this statement in time…

    The Sarin et al Chlorite Matrix (which is similar to MMS) is highly effective

  7. Greetings Adam and Grant,
    Grant I have taken on board your position on this issue and the more I read your comments and responses to questions, I find a prevailing discord with your findings and Jim Humble’s MMS history. Sure, a lot of it shows a lot of effort and in-dept explanations. But this is it; your explanations seem at times to be confusing or contradictory. The chemicals focus upon here seems to be Ozone, Chlorine Dioxide CLO2, Sodium Chlorate, and Sodium Chlorite in particular.
    Ozone, Chlorine Dioxide, as well as Sodium Chlorate are well established as powerful oxidisers so you get no arguments there. But it is also shown that they might be providing a remarkably new and positive personality that are not fully understood when they encounter provided chemicals in the MMS matrix –mainly the chemicals that apply to MMS. It is this area that is posing an air of confusion and contradiction.
    You have made claimed the necessary type of conditions to look for when some of these chemicals mentioned are present/to be present. Yet some viewers have disclosed that the remaining of your proposed conditions persist; even when the targeted chemical has been removed. Your response to that was that they were other chemicals being involved. But you did not fully clarify who these hidden chemicals as such were. In another instance you have cautioned to having the presence of some of the above mentioned chemicals and to adopt a zero tolerance. Yet you refused to consider that in the combination that they are, that some remarkable cooperation, or checks and balances occurs that we are yet to fully understand.
    I have been drawn in this directional thinking when attempting to reconcile with yours. If nothing else you have got me THINKING.
    For those who are not aware of Jim Humble’s explanation for MMS. My extrapolation is that they are five charges made available on consumption of MMS which on contact with any acidic organisms in the body ie. Pathogens, Viruses, Moulds, Fungus etc –the bad guys -are immediately destroyed. Jim Humble contends that these bad guys possessed an opposite charge to MMS and expands further by saying that the scientific rule is that opposites attract and same repels. Therefore the cells which carry the similar charge as MMS are left alone -in other words the healthy cells. It is further given that the MMS can penetrate an invaded unhealthy cell and zap the bad guys –giving such a cell the opportunity to recover and ultimately the immune system.

    Grant et al, my understanding of your proposition is that on the consumption of MMS it goes into the cell and aids the functionality describe as the Kreb Cycle. You have further insisted that if the Kreb Cycle in disallowed then body recovery is impossible. You have further claimed that for this to occur effectively the presence of certain chemicals must be zero present when administering MMS –mainly Sodium Chlorate and Ozone.

    My stuck is that Jim Humble’s explanation however true or not true it might be -seems a very logical process and plausible possibility. Grant et al seems more complex and leaves gaps in the process –like an event being televised but only the middle or end is revealed.
    My other stuck is your repeated claim that Jim Humble’s MMS is somewhat potentially harmful –yet does not exist or reflected in its worldly results –so why not?
    In an attempt to reduce any vagueness so far –to reveal how I am thinking, consider the analogy of getting dressed for work. They will always be a methodology with few variations –mainly, you will put your socks on before you put your shoes on –you would put your underpants on before you put your trousers on. With the socks you would make sure that they are not on the wrong side when put on. You would tie your shoelace after you put on your shoes. And even then you would not put your left shoe on your right and visa versa. You would make sure that your underpants are not put on back to front and so on. This methodology is like a law and the further I deviate from it the less effective I would be at getting dress/to work. So in order to reach the end results there is a process that would be applied to all who get dress for work.

    Ok so let’s go back Grant et al to your proposition. My stuck is that the commonalities should ring through as a process in your proposition –I am failing to identify them. You have emphasised a great deal focus on the cell at the expense of what is suggested to be taking place in Jim Humble’s MMS. But the manner in which you propose is leading me to ask the following:

    NB: my animated writing is not to be construed as being flippant –but to invoke a cognitive assessment in laymen -of the information provided in your proposition.
    1. Before MMS entered a sick body the cells were ineffective at performing its duty –why?
    2. Those cells were once healthy –now they are not –what made them unhealthy? What hinders them returning to original health?
    3. We might even add that to take MMS out of the picture; the prospect of those cells having a positive conclusion was dim. Why?
    4. The conventional thinking has been that having Pathogens; Viruses, Parasites, Mould and Fungus etc –the bad guys -posed a direct negative impact on the body –surely this is still the case? If not, then why?
    5. Is having these bad guys; in your body irrelevant to the functionality of the cell?
    6. So does the MMS chemicals on entering the body -riddle with these bad guys -completely ignores these bad guys and head straight for the defective and deprived cell or healthy cells for that matter –then delivers some needed ammunition –then steps aside and allow the cells to go and vanquish the bad guys? Which before then they were incapable of doing so?

    My stuck is that when I apply these questions to Jim Humble’s explanation there is more clarity then when I apply them to yours.
    The problem too often is that there is always a push to direct an understanding –that must be one thing vs. the other without considering the eclectic possibilities that might be involved.

    I raise this thinking in the face of Jim Humbles MMS and have drawn certain aspects of thinking and deductive reasoning as follows:
    1. If these chemicals are volatile and aggressive as you say there are –on entering the body -then it should reflect in some percentage in the people who have faithfully taken Jim Humble’s MMS for all these years. Why hasn’t this been the case?
    2. or these chemicals are in no way present in Jim Humble’s MMS -therefore the jury of public opinion will have to return a verdict of not guilty –move along folks nothing to concern you self with here!
    3. or the amounts are relatively insignificant in the Jim Humble’s MMS Matrix to have any impact whatsoever in the health recovery – which would mean your precautionary principle is totally unjustified!
    3. or these chemicals do not perform or react in the way that conventional thinking suggested when they encounter each other. Which again would mean your precautionary principle is totally unjustified!
    4. or there has been a corrective process that renders any damage in a person who takes Jim Humble’s MMS as insignificant -to the measured gains that are constantly –constantly being reported -mainly the cause of the complaint has been completely removed and person’s life has returned to normality. Which again would mean your precautionary principle is totally unjustified!

    Something has got to give way here. Because in spite of the colourful insight into what is considered to be taking place in the cell and the modified terminologies given ie. Kreb cycle and Chlorite Matrix; in my humble opinion it does not add up when reflecting it upon Jim Humble’s MMS. Some people should have been seriously hurt by now -including you Grant and your dogs!
    I must add that all of this precautionary driven information is nothing more than a hypothesis at best and certainly not a theory. What is lacking is a correlation study of this new Rethinking and its implied improved benefits Vs correlation benefits of the Jim Humble’s MMS and its original thinking, which up to this day has shown to be exemplary at making unhealthy people healthy.


    1. It may well point out that there is no significant difference of benefit in the new Rethinking and the Common thinking of Jim Humble’s MMS.
    2. Or it may well show that the new Rethinking being a vast improvement to healing above the performance of Jim Humbles MMS.
    What you have placed before us so far is a BELIEF that you are right and inviting folks to contract with that belief by taking the actions you prescribe. in disregard of that Jim humble’s MMS has contributed so far without falter
    It must also be explained that why in the face of everything Grant et al have said; Why? Why? Why? No one has been discovered with any BIOLOGICAL OR PHYSICAL DAMAGE as a direct result of taking Jim Humble’s MMS!
    Take care of your self and each other!

  8. Don Cuthbert

    I have been watching some of your videos about MMS, chlorine dioxide (ClO2), chlorite matrix (ClO2-) and reading Grant Maanum’s comments here and on YouTube. I recently purchased some sodium chlorite and citric acid powders and solutions and am attempting to learn the best way to use them. I have seen the “Chlorine Dioxide Solution” CDS-making videos produced and/or narrated by Andreas Kalcker where the gas produced in the sodium chlorite/citric acid reaction is bubbled through cold water to create a yellow-colored solution of the dissolved gas in water.

    Could you and/or Grant answer some questions:
    – are you saying that the gas produced is not chlorine dioxide gas, but is a safe gas composed of ClO2- anions? I presume that ClO2- would also be in a gaseous state and water soluble, as ClO2 is.
    – or are you saying that any gas produced is evidence that the sodium chlorite was not pure and contained some sodium chlorate?

    Some are trying to destroy parasites using “ClO2” solution (which you are saying is more likely to be a ClO2- solution) along with other anti-parasite protocols. Could ClO2- or Chlorite Matrix harm parasites or would it be just as health-giving to their cells as to our ours? (Is it possible that it is a mix of ClO2- and ClO2 that is working in these cases: The ClO2- helping to heal/repair us from whatever damage ClO2 does to the parasites and to our own cells?)

    Another possibility would be that the Chlorite Matrix could no more harm a parasite’s cells than it could harm our own. Those who are successfully using it to deal with parasites are giving health to their own cells and immune system and only the anti-parasite protocols are ejecting the parasites.

    Any thoughts?

    Thanks to you and Grant for trying to promote truth, understanding and clarity to what has become a controversial topic. The more anyone can help others to understand enough about this to try to help themselves the better, even if some cannot grasp all of the chemistry.

Leave a Comment