MMS Founder has nothing but Time on his Hands (Part 2)
Jim Humble, the founder and lead seller of the fake cure for Malaria (and just about anything else he can get people to believe) MMS has nothing but time on his hands.
After reading my post about how MMS doesn’t cure Malaria he sent me a response. I replied, and assumed that would be the end of the matter. It wasn’t. Jim Humble (or someone using his name) sent me a reply. I’ll be emailing him back and giving a detailed response when I’m done writing it, but for now here’s the email:
Hello Cogito,
Well, I know I am not going to change your mind nor do anything to make you doubt your course of action, but I will answer you this one time. Your last remark was rather stupid “MMS doesn’t work, and is in fact dangerous” and I will start with that. Again you just take the word of government agencies which if you look up their stock records on the private part of the New York stock exchange you will see that they are indeed private.
You blindly believe what ever the government tells you, obviously, and that tells me you are still asleep. It is no more logical to believe the government without proof than it is to believe me. And of course that tells me you will never understand if I tell you I have something that can cure millions and I have a world wide record, you then think it is your job to prove me wrong. No, no, it is your job to prove me right. It is your duty to humanity to prove me right. It is everyone’s job to help, it is not your job to hinder unless you have proof, but government declarations are not proof. If you can’t prove me right after real research, then you can publish that. But your duty to humanity is to help, not to hinder. So far you have only proved you are on the side of those who would kill us.
First read this: Is it Safe to Take MMS? In 20 years, since the discovery of MMS, we are not aware of anyone dying or anyone suffering permanent injuries as a result of using MMS (chlorine dioxide in a solution, which is the way it is used 99% of the time throughout the world).
And No, we do not use as you state MMS at 22.4% sodium chlorite. We use as our normal dose 3 drops of that 22.4% in 1/2 cup of water. No one ever takes 22.4% sodium chlorite. So again you believe the government blindly. The solution that is taken is 720 times diluted. So you see the government lies by not telling the truth and you help them.
We only know of one recorded death (an industrial accident) caused by chlorine dioxide gas many years before MMS was discovered. This is in spite of the fact that chlorine dioxide has been used extensively to purify water, to sanitize hospital floors, to disinfect slaughter houses, and to purify vegetables, along with hundreds of other uses. More than any other single mineral/chemical, chlorine dioxide through these and other means has improved the health and lives of hundreds of millions of people worldwide and still no deaths or permanent injuries have been recorded caused by the use of chlorine dioxide in 100 years. This also includes the many millions of people who have taken MMS orally for the purpose of health restoration. Compare no deaths, except a single industrial accident not related to MMS, to the approximately 950,000 deaths caused by pharmaceutical drugs yearly, or the 15,000 deaths caused by Ibuprofen and Aspirin, in the US alone per year. All things considered, chlorine dioxide is one of the safest, if not the safest chemical known. For more details see: http://www.webdc.com/pdfs/deathbymedicine.pdf
DMSO (dimethyl sulfoxide) is also used in some of our protocols. In the 60 years since DMSO was introduced in the USA there has never been a report of permanent damage or a death caused by DMSO. DMSO has been scientifically proven to have healing qualities of its own as well as enhancing the effectiveness of MMS.
This is my disclaimer as it seems everyone must have a disclaimer now days: I have given certain advice in the above email letter. It is the advice I would follow myself if I were in the same situation. However I do not advise you or the person this letter refers to, to follow my advice without getting the advice of a professional. Each person must take responsibility for his own health. So, please do what you feel is best.
Thank you for taking the time to write to me regarding my article on MMS and its efficacy in treating Malaria. Below you will find my point by point response:
Ah yes, I just read your “scientific” review or rather I should say “Fake Science” review of the video of the Red Cross curing 154 cases of Malaria in Uganda. I got to say that you guys have the nerve to call it science that you are relying on. You know nothing about the chemistry of chlorine dioxide or sodium chlorite.
“Nothing” is a bit of a stretch, however it it is true I am not a chemist. But then again, neither are you.
How do you know this? I spent 10 years in research laboratories in Aero-space as a non-degreed engineer. Check it out, most laboratories prefer non-degreed engineers as they knew we had to have much experience before we were allowed that title.
You rely on the word of private agencies (FDA)
The FDA is not a private agency. It is a Government Agency, funded by tax dollars and accountable to Congress. A private organization would be Genesis Church, the one by which you train individuals to administer your Miracle Mineral Solution to patients.
who would lose billions of dollars if MMS came into universal use.
The FDA is a government funded agency and will neither gain nor lose money based upon what drugs are approved. Their sole purpose is regulation.
Wow, believe as you wish.
The evidence is, the whole bunch of you are a bunch of fakes.
What evidence would this be? Who is the “you” of which you speak. You seem to think that I am a member of some nefarious cabal hell-bent on discrediting you. The truth of the matter is I am a blogger whose website has a medium amount of readers and the fact that you feel my small blog post warrants a reply such as this is fascinating given my current level of readership.
The proof is in what you wrote without proof but somehow thinking you have proof.
You set at home with your computer, read a few words from some government agencies and then write a long article using science to prove MMS cure malaria.
I believe you may have mistyped this sentence.
Yes, I goofed.
Except you are fakes and the science you use is Fake.
Again, calling me a “fake” without providing any evidence to support this is nothing more than an Ad Hominem fallacy.
Not really, I am basing my remarks on what you wrote without proof other than the government agency.
Regardless of whether or not I am a “shill” for some nefarious anti MMS cabal, the science I use is certainly not fake.
Since my field is Psychology and not Chemistry, I am forced to rely upon the work of experts in the field when evaluating the risks and benefits of MMS. The experts, in this case are the FDA which employs chemists and medical doctors to evaluate such claims.
When they do so they publish papers in peer reviewed journals and, most importantly here, show their work. The chemical action of MMS is very well documented.
Not really
You talk like you know what you are talking about. That is the main thing that makes you fake. The entire science that you talk about is “fake science” because it is all based on money and made up by people like you.
Again this is basic chemistry here. Something that can be looked up in any college textbook.
Most of it isn’t something you can look up in chemistry books. I know the chemistry of MMS about as good as anyone in the world. MMS chlodrine dioxide has a oxidation potential of .95Volts. Oxygen has an oxidation potential of 1.29 volts. Oxygen is very acceptable to the body and chorine dioxide has less power to hurt the body than oxygen. Bring on any of your scientific chemists and I will discuss it with him and when I am done, he will agree with me and that has happened dozens of times around the world so far.
None of you went out and talked to the people who were cured.
You are entirely missing the point. I do not need to talk to the people treated with MMS to evaluate the claims you have made about it.
When evaluating a scientific claim, the burden of proof is on the one making the claim. In this instance you claim that those treated with MMS have been cured of malaria in less than 24 hours.
As I have pointed out in my previous article this claim has not met even the lowest burden of proof. The video in question shows that a rapid test is used to test for Malaria, which is prone to false positives, a possible confound in your experimental design. Additionally, I am unaware of any study using MMS which utilizes a Randomized Controlled-Study design, which is necessary to infer causation. Without this any claim that Malaria has been “cured” by MMS must be rejected.
Furthermore you have not provided any materials that demonstrate the chemical method by which MMS “cured” malaria or any other ailment.
Until you provide these most basic requirements the burden of proof is not met; therefore I and anyone who has a basic understanding of research methods must reject your claims about MMS.
You did not watch the video very well. The rapid tests were used, but the normal scientific microscope method was used to verify the rapid tests.
None of you have even seen a bottle of MMS. None of you have any idea about the chemistry of MMS.
I have a very basic understanding of the chemistry. Granted, other than some undergraduate classes I have no training in chemistry, so much of this information is taken from the work of others, which I will cite. Please correct me if I am wrong:
Your own Wiki (I assume that this is the real James Humble and not some troll or other provocateur) describes MMS in the following manner:
- MMS is sodium chlorite 22.4% solution
- MMS1 or activated MMS is chlorine dioxide
- MMS2 is calcium hypochlorite that turns into hypochlorous acid in water
- CDS is chlorine dioxide gas put into water
- CDH is pre-activated sodium chlorite in water
Please inform me of any additional information one would receive from actually holding a bottle of MMS that is otherwise not available.
It is sort of like training doctors. The doctors spend how many years in school, but none are considered doctors until they spends years in a hospital actually doing it. Until you have at least seen a real test of malaria failed or succeeded you have no moral right to say I am wrong. You might think you are scientifically right, and maybe almost, but when we are talking about the suffering and dying of thousands you simply do not have a moral right to push you “science” on the thousands that might die because you think you are right..
Therefore, MMS would be an aqueous solution of 22.4 g of NaClO2 (sodium chlorite) dissolved in H2O (water). Now sodium chlorite is itself moderately toxic (its LD50 is 350 mg/kg). A toxic dose for a 15 kg child has been calculated by others to be 5.25 g.
So what, Aspirin is 10 times that toxic. How toxic something is when you are taking less than 100th of the toxic dose is not what is important.
However, your instructions on the preparation of MMS involve adding citric acid to the solution. When you do so the following processes take place. I am taking this directly from the excellent work of Dr Kat Day of the Chronicle Flask:
5NaClO2 + 4HCL ⇒ 5NaCl +4Cl2 + 2H2O
Dr. Day points out that the reaction is more complicated and varies depending on the pH of the solution and can be formed by various mechanisms depending on which acid is used to “activate” MMS. Here are some of the possible reactions:
NaClO2 + H+ ⇆ HClO2 + Na+
2HClO2 ⇒ ClO⇒ 5 H+ + HOCl
2HClO2 + HOCl ⇒ 2ClO2 + Cl– + H2O + H+
Through various processes, chlorine dioxide (ClO2) is formed. This substance is more toxic than sodium chlorite) (the LD50 is 292 mg/kg).
Same answer, actually the MMS dose is more than 1000 time less than the toxic dose, and again no deaths world wide have been recorded. The FDA can show none. Again compare to thousands of death caused each year by aspirine and now a little over 1 million deaths by pharmaceutical drugs after a doctor has prescribed them.
Now, as with all toxins, the dose is what makes the poison. Again, based off of the work of Dr. Day, she estimates that your recommended protocol of preparation “could produce something in the region of 36 g of chlorine dioxide per litre of water.”
This would bring the resulting solution well above the recommended safety limits of chlorine dioxide (0.00008 grams per litre of water.
Again you don’t know what you are talking about. Again I mention the normal dose of this is 3 drops of this (36 g solution per litre of water) in 1/2 cup of water (that’s 2400 drops about). Even then all protocol is that everyone starts at 1/4 drop of this solution in 1/2 cup of water. That is literally thousands of times below any danger level and about what millions of people experience daily throughout the world.
None of you left your desk while “proving” that MMS can’t cure malaria.
Perhaps the fault is mine, I should have used more precise language. No one can prove that MMS “can’t” cure malaria. That would be proving a negative and not strictly possible, logically speaking. Rather, based upon all of our knowledge of biochemistry and medicine, the claims made by MMS proponents are not possible.
There are more than 50 patents registered on chlorine dioxide in the 20th Century, at least one on HIV cures. You knowledge of biochemistry proves nothing. You don’t know biochemistry. Probably you don’t know oxidation. Oxidation kills the malaria parasite and you don’t know the hundreds of tests that have been conducted concerning chlorine dioxide. I challenge you to start looking up the various test done with chlorine dioxide. I am the main proponent of the use of MMS in the body, but thousands of tests have been conductive on the safety of Chlorine dioxide.
That is not to say that it is impossible that MMS works. Rather, we are unaware of any known mechanism by which it could work (for its claimed purpose of curing Malaria) and should it work, much of our fundamental understanding of chemistry would have to be rewritten.
Essentially, if you think MMS works, prove it. Then explain how it works.
I am telling you how it works, just like oxygen, by oxidation. It is weaker than oxygen but each molecule has twice the capacity or can destroy by oxidation twice the number of other molecules.
If there really was anyone there who understood the chemistry of chlorine dioxide you wouldn’t be able to write what you wrote except of course unless you plain out lied which, of course, is what you did.
Again, I have a very basic understanding of organic chemistry based upon some undergraduate classes. There are others, however, at the FDA as well as certain bloggers who know quite a bit more than I do. I shall defer to their superior expertise in this matter.
Well yes, you defer to other who have other interests and requirements. But that don’t make it right. Again, I refer to your obligation to mankind and earth.
By 2009 more than 20 million people had tried MMS. By 2005 one of my people had sold more than a million dollars worth MMS in Texas alone. We have trained people in 125 countries of the world. I personally have helped 60,000 people with MMS. My first trip in Africa in Uganda and Kenya I helped more than 4000 malaria cases overcome malaria. I didn’t set at my desk I went their and handed to MMS to each malaria case.
I don’t doubt that you handed MMS out to several patients. I don’t doubt that you’ve made millions off of selling it. What I doubt is your claim that it works.
I have never sold MMS personally. I live in a small appartment in a poor neighborhood in Mexico and that definitely is not because I am rich.
When I asked the FDA about proving MMS they explained the process to me and said that it takes about 800 million dollars to finally get approval and 5 years.
This appears to be an oversimplification of the process, based upon my experience. Having never worked in a medical study my experience will differ somewhat, but the basic process is the same.
To design a study to test the effectiveness of a certain drug’s ability to combat an illness (read here: MMS to treat Malaria) one would first need to perform several animal studies. To do so would require a laboratory, as well as the required equipment and trained lab professionals. In addition, ethical approval would be required both from the FDA as well as whatever institution you represent (typically a university or other research group).
In order to get ethical approval you would have to pass certain hurdles. First of which would be to describe the proposed mechanism by which MMS cures malaria. To the best of my knowledge you have yet to do so. Second, you would need to provide safeguards ensuring that no un-due harm is inflicted upon the animals. Again, I do not believe you have met this burden as all of our understanding of chemistry in this matter indicates that MMS is harmful to animal life, be it rats or humans.
Assuming, however, that you got approval for animal studies, you would then need to design a proper protocol. This would involve double-blind testing as well as randomized control groups. One would also assume that you would test the efficacy of different doses, as well as the efficacy of MMS on various stages of Malaria.
Let us assume that at the soonest this would take a year. After this, you would then need to submit your findings and get approval for human trials. This would involve an entirely new set of safeguards, as well as a scrutinous review of the findings of your animal trials. All of which would take time.
If we assume that you receive approval for human trials, again you would need to write very clear safety protocols to ensure as little risk to your human subjects as possible is posed by your drug. Again, I don’t see how this is possible given what we know about MMS. You would then have to do a series of pilot studies on small sample sizes. This would be to ensure that something about the chemistry of human bodies does not differ from that of rats. You would then follow this up with several larger-scale studies, usually connected with large research hospitals.
I am unsure of the cost of this entire venture but 5 years seems to be rather quick from my understanding of things. However, that’s how science works. When it comes to research on human subjects, every possible safety measure is created to ensure the wellbeing of the participants.
To bypass this procedure is simply to say that you do not care about the safety of your patients and are unwilling to wait to make sure that your product actually works.
This whole procedure has been developed to protect the profits of the 1% that are rich. Ninety years ago in the USA people began to use sodium chlorite for various diseases. During the whole time sodium chlorite has been sold in health food stores for about 90 years now. Hundreds of thousands of people have used it successfully. And the fact that most people have hydrochloric acid in their stomaches gave them chlorine dioxide. And the fact that we now use mostly hydrochloric acid to activated sodium chlorite in similar amounts to that in the stomach also gives us chlorine dioxide.
But I realize at that time, because of liars like you guys, I would never get MMS approved. But I don’t have to get it approved. There are already millions of people who believe in it, and fake articles by people who have never seen a person with malaria simpy doesn’t change that. People all over Africa are being cured in private places. I can save thousands of more people and alleviate suffering of thousands by simply doing it rather than waisting time on fake science trying to prove it. Some day you guys are going to have to answer for all the suffering you didn’t stop but could have. Do you think God will excuse you because the FDA didn’t want to lose money.
Again, the FDA would not lose money from approving MMS.
You theory that it is OK to allow people to go on suffering because it wasn’t proven by science is simply evil.
That is not my premise at all. If MMS works then it should be given to Malaria patients, provided it doesn’t do any harm to the patient. But until it has been shown to both work and be safe it should not be given to unsuspecting patients.
I see, the fact that hundreds of thousand of people have been taking it for about 90 years makes no difference to the FDA and I have to assume it makes no difference to you. Prove it by your science for years and years while millions die. Well, I am not waiting for that. Thousands of people are now using MMS, not because someone was pushing science, but rather someone was saving lives and that includes thousands of us and people like you will continue to try to stop us with lies and what ever you can think up but the more you scream the more people you interest.
If someone says he has a cure for malaria it is your responsibility to see if it will or will not work if you are going to be the one who writes where others can read it.
Certainly not. This is called shifting the burden of proof, a logical fallacy. If you claim that MMS works to cure malaria, you must show that it does. Until you do so I will not advocate for its use. Furthermore, based upon the judgement of others, I will advocate against its use until it can be shown that it does not have deleterious effects on humans, in a lab, under strict safety protocols.
Bull shit. You care nothing for helping people.
I took MMS to the people in the bush in Africa and many places and helped thousands. More the 60,000 personally. All you want to do is slow me down and stop me if you can while I alleviate the suffering of thousands. Instead, if you were a true member of humanity you would be interested in helping me instead of proving me wrong.
Also, in the United States I have some pretty broad rights regarding freedom of speech. If I were to, for example, write that vaccines are dangerous (they’re not) I would be protected so long as I did not attempt to pass myself off as a medical professional (I’m not).
Not so. People who write about vaccines being bad are attacked. Forced vaccines are happening in California for children. Again you know nothing.
When you write you have a responsibility to your readers.
I suppose I do, and that responsibility to to promote accurate information based upon my understanding of science.
But then, of course, if you are with those who want to kill most of us and make slaves of the rest of us then you are evil in any case.
This is essentially a combination of an Ad Hominem Fallacy and a Begging the Question Fallacy. Let us assume that there are those who want to “kill most of us and make slaves of the rest of us”. Even if this is true (maybe it is) you have no evidence that I am one of them. And even if I were, the science happens to be on my side. Frankly, my motives are irrelevant in this instance: the science is clear. MMS doesn’t work, and is in fact dangerous.
See the first paragraphs.
Well anyway. We are winning regardless of the fake science and fake news.
Jim
Recent Comments