Reid pointed out something that the genetics people don’t really tell you.  Cancers as a rule develop in organs, we thought.  No, not quite―they develop on the outside of an organ.  From there it spreads before going inwards. Or even to another organ. In the case of bones, it begins outside only to move inside.  Not always. Nothing is always.

 

Reid was thinking in terms of body structures not in terms of genetic codes.  Body organs and indeed bones all represent cavities in the body.  It was the strange behaviour of cavities that first made it necessary to develop Planck’s Constant so long ago.  So if ever we have reason to think that cancer might have something to do with particle physics then this is it : heat radiation and cavities.  The Black Box experiment.

 

But another characteristic of cancer is energetically interesting and no one will tell you because it’s so political.  Cancers really go wild when you fiddle with them, irritate them, poke them with instruments, cut them,  operate on them.  Why? You are disturbing the energy field around them, and when you do, they grow even faster.  What are the consequences when the energy field is there to control growth, and you destroy it?  You might think then that operating on growths is not such a great idea.  Perhaps it is a better idea to try to get the body field to work again as a controller of growth. . . .

 

The silliness of natural therapists knows no bounds, not only according to the more medically informed.  There is a history behind this silliness. Allopathic medicine was born on the dead bodies of homeopaths whose main idea about the genesis of pathology was intoxication by certain chemicals, the  identical ones that the drug barons and backers of the  allopathic colleges in the 1920’s, and forever afterwards, wanted to produce.  So naturally, and for genuine historical reasons,  natural therapists have a thing about toxins.  The chemical industry has never been frank about the effects on humans of the chemicals they produce.  That is their right.  But remember that homeopaths used to be the world’s best toxicologists, and that their volumes of data about energetic toxicology are still in existence―in the vaults under the public libraries. They have been taken from the shelves and stored in the vaults!  The data the homeopaths collected was not data from the LD50 experiments on luckless rats, but were all done on living human beings. Their data is of little or no use now there are 100,000 toxic chemicals in our immediate environment.  Remember, too, that no allopathic doctor can even begin to acknowledge toxins are a cause of disease until you mention genetic damage caused by chemical exposure.  Did this get into the medical course?  No, the medical text books may have been written and financed by a major chemical company.

 

Reid had little interest in toxins.  He never used one example of a toxin and its relationship to cancer except in one interesting case.  That of epithelioma―a lung cavity disease caused by long-term exposure to asbestos of certain types.  The point is that asbestos is almost completely inert chemically, and that it causes cancer over 20 years or more simply by being there in the lungs for that time.

 

So, instead of looking at things as though there are “toxins” in the late nineteenth century sense as we all used to doing, now we look at toxins and have to ask, Do these things block off the body field?”  Reid himself put me up to a major experiment, a pivotal one you might call it, which is worth describing again.  Reid, from his previous 38 years of reading academic papers (things that I found pretty incomprehensible) managed to find that lead, tin, ytterbium and  tantalum all were able to block what he called “a field.”

 

This field was surely not an electromagnetic one, the only one people really seem to think there is.  But if de Broglie is right, then all electrons create a field because they all have a frequency and they move.  Or as we now know, they appear to move.  When they do so, a field is created.  This is the field that Reid said would be blocked by the elements I have mentioned as well as by all of their compounds.

 

So, to reiterate, electrons make a field, and it’s not an electromagnetic one. We were now looking for field blockers simply because we needed to explain how an energy field can block the operation of one of the millions of immune cells in the blood, so that cancer, an alien tissue, can grow in the body.

 

Reid and I set up an experiment to make the field occur, in this case between two metal blocks, and then an electrical measurement was taken to indicate that the field was present.  Then the field was broken, simply by placing a piece of tin plate in the field. It collapsed immediately.  But I did not have any lead plate, nor any fisherman’s tackle nearby, so I used a homeopathic replica of lead, made electronically with an imprinting machine.  Let me make that clear: I used an energetic copy of lead and the field collapsed.  Reid nearly collapsed too.  It meant that a memory of lead, tin, ytterbium  or tantalum in your body could also cause a field blockage.  A real piece of lead―yes, we know this will cause disease. But the memory of a lead or a lead salt?   This is a long shot―to show that we understand what memory really is.  It is a homeopathic or energy copy of the real thing.  The memory angle can relate to the emotional causes of cancer, of which more later on.

 

Another bioenergetic characteristic of all biology, which is worth mentioning, is that of capacitance.  This is an electrical term about how space itself can store energy.  So if cancer is too much energy, as a lot of people seem to think, that cannot discharge, which is what William Reich thought, then capacitance is if great importance in understanding this. Yes, cells themselves do have a measurable capacitance, and there is plenty of research about this already done.

 

So, of course, I began to wonder what it was about the lead that went into the copier―what information was being stored when we made the copy?  Did it take a lot of repetitions to store the information?  What was the information and what was it being stored in? As you can see, not much was then known about the science terrain of our study.

 

Simplistic ideas about cancer can be ruled out simply because there are 135 types according to Reid and more than 200 according to more modern assessments.  I was looking for common characteristics, of the energetic kind, and these were hard to find indeed. All the evidence from everywhere points to an annoying multifactorial cause of cancer that is very unsatisfying for the purist.  We shall see…

 

 

·        Some discoveries related to the development of the cancer markers.

 

Early in the 1990s I had developed energetic markers for primary cancer, as well as for various degrees of development of a non-malignant cancer towards transformation: its take off point where it becomes malignant and starts to move around to other organs.

 

Of course I wanted to test to see if we could match these cancer markers to other fields, which might shed some daylight on what was linked to cancer in any way at all.  I had at my disposal some hundreds of natural therapists’ stock in trade.  I had also several hundreds of ampoules of homeopathic medicines gleaned from all around the world.

 

 

You still think cancer is chemical in its origin?  If you do, it will surely mean that actual energy replicas of the cancer (of which I  had  scores in a test  kit produced in Germany) would work on their own, to give us information that was worthwhile.  They did not.  The cancers only give useful matching information when they were alive and living inside a human body.  So I could not use the homeopathic replicas of cancer for research.  When I did, on several occasions I became extremely physically ill and had to go outside to vomit on the lawn outside my house.  This actually happened quite a few times, and I made up my mind that any curative thing that I ever developed should only have healthy information in it.  Hence, this occurred in NES. Nothing in NES is “bad” energy.

 

So the upshot of all these realisations ( some of which may have taken months to occur) was that I could legitimately use the cancer markers, which were not cancers, but something else, sets of numbers that were so far meaningless, as test material to find out what foods, vitamins and herbs were related to cancer.

 

I tested herbs, foods, vitamins, minerals, homeopathic material medica, elements, all to no avail. I was horrified!  I tested them all again and again on different days, and found nothing was able to match the cancer marker for primary and secondary cancer.  I had of course hundreds of agricultural chemicals stolen and begged from farmers’ sheds around Australia, for the purpose of testing.  On their own, they did  not form a “match “in the energetic sense.  Of all the black days in research, this was one of the greatest.  All the natural therapy theories had vanished in one day.  But the matching technique does not give the “right” answer in the absolute sense, but the “best” answer, considering the test.

This will not stand up in a court of law because it is what might be called circumstantial:  it all depends on the surrounding information sets.

 

The allopaths had won the day, and the whole of the natural therapists’ range of things were absolutely useless with cancers of all types. And the dreaded agricultural toxins were not to be implicated either. Now, not only would the allopaths cut me dead at parties, the naturopaths would as well, if they ever found out!  Already the acupuncture people I had spent 13 years with regarded me as a misfit who should be ignored.  So if you think I complain about being ostracized by allopaths, please remember that everyone does it!

 

To be quite honest, I did have some samples of chemotherapy agents brought to me by clients no longer using them, and yes, these did match to the cancer markers as one would expect they would! Well, you may like to stop reading now if you don’t agree with me, but remember that I don’t even agree with myself!  There had to be a chemical “link” between the cancer and the chemotherapy agent or it would not work!  It does not mean it’s the correct treatment, necessarily.