Q: A study/experiment is usually trying to prove a theory. What theory is the “Live Blood and Cellular Matrix Study” trying to prove?

A: The main hypothesis of our Study is that we all may be sulfur deficient. What we are trying to demonstrate is that by adding sulfur back into our diet we can allow healthy cellular regeneration to occur through the enabling of oxygen by sulfur. Sulfur is necessary for our bodies to make many of our amino acids and proteins. The function of the cell membrane is dependent upon the proteins and peptides in these membranes that allow the transport of nutrients and gases across the membrane. When these proteins and peptides are diminished the cell membrane become aplastic and leathery forcing the cell to undergo anaerobic metabolism, acidosis or fermentation are examples of unhealthy cellular metabolism and result in cellular degeneration. When cells are allowed to regenerate after years of being scarred or damaged we believe this is an example of how cellular regeneration can be reactivated and some of the examples of neurological regeneration may be the most impressive.

We follow our Study members with digital photographs of their face to support what they report from taking Organic Sulfur.

Q: There are about 4,000 minerals. Why has sulfur, a mineral, been emphasized by the Live Blood and Cellular Matrix Study? What is its importance?

A: Sulfur is a mineral but is first it is an element listed on the Periodic Table. Without oxygen we die. Sulfur, Selenium and Tellurium are the elements of the Oxygen Group. The interaction or enabling of oxygen is what makes sulfur so important regarding cellular regeneration. Everything on the planet including minerals is made of elements and there are only 118 elements if you include the “man made” series.

Like the human body the 3,800 minerals are made from the interaction of the elements. Sulfur is is an element with two main mineral forms: Elemental sulfur which is produced by volcanic activity in the atmosphere and organic sulfur which is produced by the same volcanic activity in sea water. The salt in sea water allows the sulfur to be released directly into the water and we believe that this is beginning of the sulfur cycle for all living organisms. Our research into the nature of sulfur leads us to believe that its bio availability is effected not only by temperature but also by the ease with which it bonds with most of the other elements. There is a sulfate, sulfite or sulfide of most of the other elements and this is the source of many compounds known as minerals.

Sulfur is not bio available in many of its compounded forms and some are toxic. Elemental sulfur is toxic to insects and animals. When you are in Yellowstone believe the signs that say don’t drink the water from sulfur springs. The other issue that is the sulfur cycle itself, animals do not store sulfur save for a minute amount in keratin found in hair, nails and cartilage so it must be supplied daily to be effective. Sulfur is passed every 12 hours after being ingested and the reason that most forms of manure are an excellent source of sulfur. Though sulfur is not a true catalyst sulfur enables oxygen through protein production. Without a constant supply of sulfur we are, in effect, dying each day through cellular degeneration.

Q: How did you become involved with the Live Blood and Cellular Matrix Study?

A: I was introduced to sulfur by accident. In 1999 I was given some MSM [Methylsulfonylmethane] as an alterative to acid indigestion for which I had been using tons of Tums, and the MSM worked in four days. I began to research the active element of MSM which is organic sulfur. Shortly thereafter my son was diagnosed with testicular cancer and following all of the surgery, chemotherapy and a stem cell transplant his physicians stated that his chance of survival was less than 3% in the next few years. They offered no further hope or therapy.

The research into sulfur revealed a relationship between oxygen and cancer, aerobic verses anaerobic cellular metabolism as described by Otto Warburg. He received a Noble Prize for proving that cancer was anaerobic in 1930. One ‘on line’ Study from Great Britain described 28,000 women who chose not to repeat surgery, chemotherapy or radiation therapy for their breast cancer but opted to take a pure form of MSM and had no reoccurrence of their cancer from 1975 to 2000. That article made me encourage my son to take sulfur. He is alive and cancer free 8 years later. Our Study was begun in an effort to explain not only that we are sulfur deficient but that most of the MSM methylsulfonylmethane which we tested was not as effective as demonstrated by the early researcher such as Dr. Stanley Jacob. The examples of cellular regeneration did not begin to be reported until we found a pure crystal precipitate which was not processed past precipitation. When this same crystal was pulverized our Study members reported that it less effective. MSM in pill, capsule or powder form are made with anti caking ( flow ) agents and as discussed regarding how sulfur bonds so easily these flow agents have been reported to inhibit or block the uptake of sulfur. Silicon dioxide completely blocks sulfur. Those Study members who had been taking one of these forms of MSM reported a remarkable improvement in effectiveness over those contaminated by pulverizing or the addition of anti caking agents.

Q: What is the fertilizer in our food made of and what effects does it have on our health? How does the fertilizer now, in terms of mineral content, differ from the fertilizer of the pre-industrial age?

A: Pre industrial age fertilizers were organic, natural decomposition of organic material mainly manures. Chemical fertilizers are produced from high temperature processing of organic materials such as coal tar and later crude oil. The use of temperatures above the vaporization point of sulfur as described by the petrochemical company’s own web sites appear to be the issue.

Those cultures which have organic fertilized food supplies have lower disease than those who use artificial forms of plant foods. Finland banned the use of chemical fertilizers because of they feared the cadmium and its perceived toxic abilities in 1985. Their epidemiology has shown a 10 fold improvement compared to that of the US in 1985 which had almost identical numbers.

This is a story that may be too convoluted to tell briefly. But regarding sulfur hopefully this will suffice. Chemical fertilizers were first developed in the 1700s by a Polish researcher. Not until Farbin ( Bayer ) adopted this research and began producing chemical fertilizers from coal tar in 1860 did their use affect those who ate the food. Two medical events which occurred in Germany we feel could be directly related to these fertilizers. 1906 Dr Alzheimer described “ women lost in their own minds.” otherwise Alzheimer’s which had not observed in countries other than Germany until after the adoption of the use of these chemical fertilizers. Most of Europe had adopted these fertilizers before the start of WW2. In 1920, Dr. Otto Warburg had an opportunity to see enough cancer to describe the basis for his Noble Prize work while cancer was less evident in other countries. In 1938 when the price of gas and crude oil was cheap Prescott Bush [the grandfather of current (2008) U.S. President George W. Bush] and Nelson Rockefeller [the son of John D. Rockefeller] contracted with Farbin I.G. to develop a crude oil based fertilizer in the West Nile Region of Africa. That formula which is known as Ammonium Sulfate and Ammonium Nitrate is the leading formula for most chemical fertilizers used world wide.

These fertilizers are devoid of sulfur due to the 380 degree F temperatures at which they are “crackled.” The other issue is that these fertilizers bind up any free sulfur available in rain water from the sulfur cycle.

Sulfur is the forgotten nutrient as stated by Dr. Beth Ley, Ph.D. Sulfur is the third or fourth most important mineral ( element ) necessary for healthy metabolism yet sulfur is not discussed in medical or scientific literature. The assumption is that we get all of the sulfur we need from our food we eat and that may have been true until we changed the way we feed our food.

A review of the epidemiology of the US since 1954 when chemical fertilizers were mandated shows as much as a 4,000% increase in cancer and other disease entities. The responses from our Study members appear to suggest that by adding sulfur to their diets these disease entities have been reversed or addressed in a positive manner.

Finland is an interesting case for the effects of chemical fertilizers. Fearing the cadmium these fertilizers contained Finland banned their use in 1985. Nowhere was sulfur ever mentioned regarding these fertilizers.

Other cultures such as the Amish which use only organic fertilizers also enjoy fewer diseases though we must rely on the fewer studies regarding their “epidemiology.” Okinawa and South Korea have lower disease rates compared to the rest of Japan or North Korea. Brazil has higher disease rates than Argentina which relies on manure rather than chemical fertilizers.

The manufacturers of chemical fertilizers argue that their products produce greater crop yields, but the question is whether the nutritional value is also higher compared to the gross tonnage. [a very interesting point]

Q: You’ve noted “Without a constant supply of sulfur we are, in effect, dying each day through cellular degeneration.” What are some ways a person can get an adequate supply of sulfur in their body to stay healthy?

A: Prior to the use of chemical fertilizers, we and many nutritional researchers as stated in Jack Challem’s article the “Sulfur Solution” our nutritional need for sulfur was supplied by all of the food we ate. We argue that since we have altered the bio available sulfur our food receives have become sulfur deficient. Grass eating livestock plus organically grown produce could again supply our need for sulfur. Those cultures which eat organically grown foods are not sulfur deficient. Garlic, green onions, kale, broccoli and spinach are high in sulfur, if grown organically. Sulfur is a mineral which is not made by plants or animals, it is either in our soils or NOT. Until we return to a more organic agribusiness then supplementing is the only way we see to allow our bodies to stay healthy regarding our need for sulfur. We feel it is important to remember that we and all living organisms are cells which are combined within a matrix to form all of our “parts” and in turn our whole.

Q: You’ve written that “The research into sulfur revealed a relationship between oxygen and cancer, aerobic verses anaerobic cellular metabolism as described by Dr. Otto Warburg. He received a Noble Prize for proving that cancer was anaerobic in 1930.”

A: This is very intriguing. Linus Pauling was the only person in history who was awarded two unshared Nobel prizes and he stated that "You can trace every sickness, every disease and every ailment to a mineral deficiency.” Everett Storey, another scientist who invented the water-splitting technology that made the hydrogen bomb possible, stated that "It is time for the general acceptance of the concept that even in some terminal cases, our bodies can be given essential building blocks [oxygen, electrolytes, minerals, enzymes, amino acids] to repair and reconstitute every living cell within a span of 11 months." Now, Dr. Otto Warburg, another Nobel Prize winning scientist comes into the picture.

Q: Can you briefly describe the “relationship between oxygen and cancer, aerobic verses anaerobic cellular metabolism” and the work of Dr. Otto Warburg?

A: Cellular biology can be restated as cellular regeneration, throughout our life time we regenerate all of our cells save for memory cells. What Dr. Otto Warburg described was anaerobic cellular metabolism in plants as the healthy model. When plants were forced into aerobic metabolism fermentation occurred and the cellular regeneration ceased and plant cell necrosis occurred. On the other side of the symbiotic scale when animal cellular metabolism becomes anaerobic a similar form of fermentation or acidosis becomes the rule. An animal cell will undergo mitosis with or without intracellular oxygen, or it will die if such mitosis fails to occur.

What Dr. Warburg described was anaerobic cellular metabolism in the carbon dioxide or waste gas which remains in the cell when oxygen is not transported into the cell, gas transports is cellular respiration, no new oxygen in to “push” the carbon dioxide out.

Dr Warburg “proved” that such anaerobic metabolism was the precursor to cancer. He stated that all cancer can be linked to such anaerobic metabolism which allows the cells to become acidic and the energy produced by the cells was a function of fermentation not oxygen enabled ATP.

Dr Warburg’s research makes us believe that viral infections are also anaerobic and we have had a remarkable response from those few Study members who suffer from Hep C and HIV. Decreased viral loads may not be as important as regeneration of the livers of those with Hep C. The alternatives are Interferon chemotherapy or liver
transplants if those infected can get on a transplant list. Both of these vial conditions cause cellular degeneration not only the liver but other cellular systems. We have too few Study members who have these viral conditions to make any claims but feel confident that sulfur could help with no adverse side effects. We encourage any who is infected to consider participation in our Study along with whatever other modalities they now depend. Oxygen is the enemy of all viruses whether due to its presence in the cell or the flexibility of the cell membrane which makes the virus incapable of “tearing” into the cell.

Q: What is your view on the theory that several cures for cancer do exist but the “cancer industry” is suppressing them? Among them, The Gerson Therapy, Laetrile (Vitamin B17), DCA [DCA is an odorless, colorless, inexpensive, relatively non-toxic, small molecule. And researchers at the University of Alberta believe it may soon be used as an effective treatment for many forms of cancer]

A: Our Study is not qualified to discuss the therapies you list. These “cures” differ from conventional modalities in that they address the body’s ability to heal itself rather than the intention to destroy the cancer with chemicals, surgery or radiation. We believe that the oxygen enabled by sulfur also allows the body to “cure” itself through healthy cellular regeneration. Unlike conventional or alternative approaches to diseases we believe that sulfur is the element ( mineral ) which has been missing from our diets. We don’t believe that sulfur is a “cure” but a mineral necessary for healthy cellular metabolism.

It appears that the pharmaceutical industry (cancer industry) has demonstrated a desire to suppress any and all non pharmaceutical therapies not only for cancer but all diseases. It’s the business of heath rather than what should be natural process of health. Those doctors who suggest conventional therapies do so because the research suggests that drugs, surgery and radiation are the best “legal” medical approach to treatment.

Q: That is how doctors are trained and the research has been supported by the commerce of medicine. Until the research supports other modalities then the “legal” aspect of the equation forces the cancer industry to lumber along treating disease rather than addressing its causes. The insurance industry may be complicit in this equation, will your insurance pay for preventative medicine?

A: “We are what we eat” has been effectively demonstrated if you consider the Amish and other cultures that have an organic food supply. The health of our cells depends on the basic elements that are provided by an organic food supply. Foods not fed chemicals, irradiated or processed with additives which our body cannot assimilate on the cellular level. What may be a more important issue are the diseases caused by the side effects of the drugs of pharmaceutical industry, why do most drugs advertised carry a list of adverse side effects? Why don’t carrots or spinach carry the same warnings? Why do these adverse side effects require more drugs to treat these side effects which result?

These drugs are not natural substances because natural substances cannot be patented. They are produced from coal tar, crude oil or from synthesized material rather than collecting the natural substances found in nature. The new drugs developed from the plants of the Amazon are not produced from these plants but are synthesized to replicate them so that they can be patented. Natural products are not subject to patents. Aspirin is the classic example and the first drug to receive a patent but not for the acetylsalicylic acid that can be extracted from while willow bark but from the acetylsalicylic acid which was synthesized in the lab. “The Aspirin Wars” by Mann and Plummer explains why our drug industry may be more interested in profits than our health. The best example is that the cancer industry does not discuss cures only treatments. The body human can cure itself if it has the necessary material such as vitamins and minerals including sulfur, which means we agree with Everett Storey.

I have mentioned “patented” numerous times and will do so again because it is a necessity for the drug manufacturers to be profitable. Is our health only an issue of profitability?

The US Constitution guarantees the rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; life is health; liberty can the freedom from disease, i.e. good health; and how do we pursue happiness if we are not healthy? Therefore we have a dilemma between the profits of corporations especially the medical and pharmaceutical industries and the rights guaranteed by not only our Constitution but by the laws of nature.

Q: I’ve interviewed many health care practitioners and I keep running across the same word no matter what field they’re in. The world is “metabolism.” What is metabolism and its importance in health?

A: Metabolism from the Greek. metaballein, “to turn about, change or alter that which an organism ingests and converts within its cells into nourishment, protoplasm, energy and waste.” The importance to our health is how “healthy” is defined for all living organisms, healthy cellular metabolism yields a healthy organism. Unhealthy cellular metabolism yields degeneration not regeneration. We believe that one of the main items that is overlooked in this process is the cell membrane and its ability to allow the basic nutrients and gases to transport across the cell membrane to permit healthy cellular metabolism. Energy can be produced by fermentation but most of that energy stays within the cells to fuel the mitosis and is not delivered to the organism as usable energy. When oxygen is not transported across the cell membrane anaerobic metabolism is the result and the Krebs cycle does not function and no extra cellular energy is available for the organism.

Q: One unintended benefit of the Live Blood Cellular Matrix Study is that it can help people get off prescription drugs safely. How did that become to be?

A: Actually the cessation of prescription drugs has never been an aim of the Study. It is what we have learned from of our Members; we have never suggested that anyone stop taking drugs. The fact that they have stopped taking most all of the drugs we see advertised and some with the blessings of their physicians may be an example of the value of aerobic cellular metabolism.

The drugs advertised for relief from gastrointestinal distress were the first to be discontinued which was not surprising from my results, but Nexium or Prilosec are not Tums nor as inexpensive.

Preteen children who stopped taking Ritalin after taking sulfur was based on the observation of their parents not our suggestions. Those who had been taking anti depressants woke up feeling better and chose not to continue taking their SSRIs. Those who had been on high blood pressure meds for years who were told by their doctors to stop was based on their blood pressure readings not our suggestion.

The cessation of statins was more voluntary but if we were to suggest a drug to stop it would be statins, after photographing retinal blood vessels we believe that the argument that cholesterol causes strokes is not supported by pathology. Microscopic study has demonstrated that calcium carbonate (rocks) or the bright plaque of Dr Hollenhorst can and do block arteries. Those who were on arthritis meds stopped taking Vioxx and Celebrex because of reduced pain and increased motility not because the Study told them to do so.

Pain is the absence of oxygen on the cellular level. Pain meds are big business for the pharmaceutical industry, therefore is it surprising that people would cease their meds for pain if their cells were being oxygenated? Other than the pain issue the regeneration of cells that were incapable of regeneration due to an aplastic cell membrane no longer flexible and plastic enough to allow the transport of the largest of the gas molecules necessary for healthy cellular metabolism, i.e. oxygen. Certain amino acids and proteins that are dependent upon sulfur and how the cell membrane allows transport across its very complex structure.

To date every drug “advertised” on the tube has been voluntarily replaced with sulfur without any adverse side effects for our Study members, the key word is voluntarily. Those study members who added sulfur to their chemotherapy regimens reported no adverse side effects to the chemotherapy and their white blood counts stayed high; normally most chemotherapy destroys the white blood cells and makes the body open to infections.

Q: Any parting words for our readers?

A: All the water that was, IS and the same is true of sulfur. We depend upon the natural cycles of life on this finite planet, sunlight or radiant energy is the only new part of the equation. The natural cycles are how these elements are utilized and when we change or alter these cycles we disrupt the nature of our cellular health. Every living organism on this planet is cellular, whether protozoa or man, we are all cells and with cell membranes. The cell membrane provides protection for its contents but it also works in concert with other cells to form a matrix to define not only our parts but the whole of the organism.

We feel that by studying the cells within their matrix will allows us to better understand how the cellular matrix can maintain the whole.

Science and medicine looks at the whole and its parts with little concern for the cells of which they are made or the matrix which allows them to perform their multi cell interactions. Our heart is an organ made of cells and via the cellular matrix it allows the continued circulation of our blood cells.

To date, The Live Blood & Cellular Matrix Study has over 90,000 voluntary study members. To join, please contact John Hammell, IAHF Study Director, at www.sulfurforhealth.com .

Source: http://www.sulfurforhealth.com

 ↑ Back to Top