Cancer and the New Biology of Water

Dr. Joseph Mercola

Dr. Thomas Cowan is a practicing physician, founding board member and vice president of the Weston A. Price Foundation.

I’ve previously interviewed Cowan on a number of different topics, including the link between vaccines and autoimmune disease, the use of low-dose naltrexone for autoimmune disease and novel treatments for heart disease. Here, we discuss his latest book, “Cancer and the New Biology of Water.” 

“I wrote a series of three books. The first one on the heart, the second one on vaccines and autoimmunity and then this one on cancer. As I got into it, I realized it was all about water,” Cowan says.

“The first book was basically two premises: One is that the heart doesn’t pump the blood. The reason for the movement of the blood in your body is not because there’s a propulsion by the heart [but] because of the dynamics of water …

Then I got into the vaccine book and what childhood illness means. That took me deeper into what cells are made of. Somehow it hit me that the whole problem of cancer is a cytoplasmic, i.e., water problem.

It became like the culmination of this series of writing and thinking about human biology, biology in general, and how wrong we have the whole thing, basically.”

Cancer and the Biology of Water

In 1971, President Nixon declared war on cancer. As noted by Cowan, we had just discovered the oncogene at that time, which was thought to be the reason for why people had cancer.

In the decades since, vast sums of money have been spent on cancer research. Were oncogenes the correct target, the war on cancer should have been won by now, yet we’re no closer to a cure today than we were back then. Cowan cites research by the Australian government, which concluded that improvement in cancer statistics as a result of chemotherapy is 2.3%.

“That’s an abysmal return on a $500 billion investment … Probably the costliest endeavor humans have ever undertaken, except maybe war,” Cowan says. “What’s the problem? The problem I submitted in the book is that cancer is not a problem of oncogenes. It isn’t even a problem of the DNA. It isn’t even a problem of the nucleus …

There have been a number of studies over the years where they transplant the nucleus from a healthy cell into another healthy cell and the progeny are normal, as you would expect.

But then they take the nucleus out of a cancer cell, where these oncogenes [are], the DNA that supposedly cause cancer, and put that into a healthy cytoplasm, the progeny are normal. When they take a normal nucleus and put it into the cytoplasm of a cancer cell, it turns the progeny cancerous.

That simple experiment tells you exactly where in the cell the problem of cancer lies, which is in the cytoplasm. The cell has two parts. Basically, it’s a lipid biomembrane that has a nucleus and a cytoplasm. The cytoplasm is basically structured water or a gel.

Now we know that the cytoplasm is the site of cancer. The events in the nucleus are a consequence of degeneration of the cytoplasm, not the other way around.

When these researchers did this, and identified clearly that the site of the cancer problem is in the cytoplasm, they postulated that something in healthy cytoplasm must be able to heal the mutations of the DNA in the nucleus, which there’s no evidence for.”

Read the rest here:

Start the Conversation

Your email address will not be published.