From his location in Africa, Jim Humble sent me, in encrypted form, his own assessment of Mr. Nash’s accusations surrounding the death of his wife Sylvie. I’ll simply publish it as received, without further comment. ~AA
October 16, 2009 — 5:42:12 AM
Subject: Response to Doug Nash
As I have already said, the loss of one’s wife is probably the greatest loss that one will ever experience and thousands of people have also mourned his loss, and so do I. I shall never wish him anything but the best of wishes for the loss he has experienced.
Having said that, there is the other side of the story that no one seems to want to face, so let me state it. After all I am probably the one person in the world who should state it. Immediately after his wife’s death Mr. Nash started on his attack of MMS. Without knowing anything about MMS, or bothering to learn anything about MMS, Mr. Nash embarked on a program to destroy a chemical that is probably at this time the most important chemical that mankind has. Out of the estimated 2 million people who have already used MMS there are at least 100 thousand lives saved and more hundreds of thousands of people have overcome their suffering and returned to living their lives back in a normal fashion.
Then if Mr. Nash had of checked just a little bit of the chemistry, because the data is readily available, he would have found that MMS is a natural chemical manufactured by the human immune system to help prevent diseases and to keep the body healthy. He didn’t check at the time and he is not checking now. All he wants is his revenge by destroying the public’s faith in this chemical and to create fear in the public’s minds. The fact is, he is taking his revenge out not on just the public, but on humanity in general. Any person in his situation must accept a certain responsibility to mankind. His statements will destroy many people’s chance to again live a normal life. In a situation of this importance most normal people are up to taking the kind of responsibility that would demand that they review the items in question and absolutely know their ground. I’ve seen it many times. Normal people just step up and do what is necessary. Here is a man, Mr. Nash, stepping up and doing what is totally unnecessary. Every time Mr. Nash sends one of his heart breaking messages he hurts hundreds if not thousands of people who will probably never use MMS because of his message.
I am 77 years old and I have studied the human psyche for over 50 years. I traveled the world and spent several hundred thousand hard earned dollars to take courses, therapy, buy books, and study with people from around the globe. My studies tell me that when a person takes such a huge disregard for his responsibility to mankind there is a reason. He is reacting like an extremely guilty man. In my opinion he is lying about something that he feels he must keep secret at all costs. Now I know that there is going to be a lot of people out there saying how terrible and unfeeling I am to say anything like this when he has experience such a terrible loss, but don’t you see I would be shirking my responsibility if I did not tell the public what I believe.
Thirteen years ago, I stood in the jungle of Guyana and accepted the responsibility to take the cure that I had found to mankind. I had also found gold in the jungle, and I could have continued being a prospector. But I accepted my responsibility and I risked my life at that time to prove my discovery. I would be shirking my responsibility, now, to not at least say what I believe.
From Mr. Nash’s actions and reactions I believe that he is lying about something in the situation that happened. I don’t know what, but I know that most people have a much greater sense of responsibility to mankind than Mr. Nash has demonstrated. In fact he as demonstrated a total lack of any kind of that responsibility and is showing an attack. In observing men in situations throughout the world where they have had losses or special situations have been thrust on them, most rise to the occasion. Only a few throw their chance to prove their worth to the wind. I believe that he is directing the attention of the public and police way from himself by ranting about MMS. It is my suggestion that Mr. Nash be completely investigated. If I had the money I would pay for it to be done, but my money is like I have always said, for the people here in Africa. If you think that is unfeeling, I am sorry. It is my job to protect MMS. There were people who witnessed his wife die, but how many people witnessed the rest of the day? We only know that she was in a comma. We need to know what happened the rest of that day, before people arrived. I am sorry, but Mr. Nash is trying too hard to blame it all on MMS. He is screaming MMS so loudly no one is looking at him. Well I can’t do anything from here in Africa. But I suggest that the police take a good look at Mr. Nash. Any person even slightly responsible would ask for an investigation. They wouldn’t rave about something they knew nothing about. Do you see? He isn’t even waiting for the autopsy reports, he is trying to do as much damage as he can before the report comes out.
I would like to point out that 2 drops that he said his wife had couldn’t possibly have caused what he claims. I have given more than two drops to a very tiny baby puppy without them even vomiting. In Africa and Mexico I have give two drops to hundreds of babies with malaria and dozens of other diseases. I have seen more people take MMS than anyone else in the world certainly more than 5000 people. Not even one person per thousand has done more than vomit 30 seconds and they didn’t last a full minute of vomiting. Now that I think about it, Mr. Nash is showing an amazing method of attack. It is like he already had the plan of attack in mind. Either he has an amazing knowledge of the Internet and the various blogs or he has some help finding the places to send his heart breaking but hate messages. I can state that I know that two drops couldn’t cause that reaction that he has told us. MMS is not a catalyst. It is an oxidizer. If the autopsy says different then we know that she had much more than 2 drops. A man in Los Angeles took 1/2 of a bottle of MMS that’s 2.75 ounces or 1403 drops. He went to the hospital, but he didn’t die. Do you see, 1403 drops didn’t kill this man and 2 drops killed Nash’s wife? Two drops cannot last in the human body longer than 1.5 hours. So if they find MMS in her body, we know something happened other than what he said. You can kill anyone by forcing too much of anything down their throat, too much water, or salt, or sugar, or anything else.
So please, any of you, don’t follow Nash’s example. Take a few minutes to at least check MMS out. At this point you too have a certain responsibility to your family, and at least to your friends and neighbors. If MMS really works, and you are willing to check that out, the fact is you will save someone’s life within the next 5 years simply because you know what it does. That is the exact statistics of it. If you don’t know that MMS works, then whoever it is will just die like they normally would, and you will probably never realize it. Statistics says that everyone in the US comes in contact at least once every 5 years with someone that is about to die. Of course, most people don’t recognize it when it happens, but it does happen. And like it or not, as a member of the human race, you also have a certain responsibility to that person that you will come in contact with in the future. Please accept that responsibility now. You will feel better knowing that you can save a life when the time comes. – Jim Humble



Lots to think about lately. I was shocked to read this, but it doesn’t stop me from utilizing MMS and taking responsibility for my use. I also participate in sweat lodges, and am stunned to hear about 3 deaths in Sedona. From reading about that sweat lodge, I believe it was a misuse of an ancient ritual of purification, and amounted to a dare to push your limits. My Native American friends would not recognize that situation as a purification lodge. Responsibility and accountability is important, and it sounds like Mr. Nash is looking for a scapegoat and found it.
By: Cecilia on October 18, 2009
at 7:02 am
In my opinion there is no prof, that anyone died from MMS, and without definite prof this is is falls accusation.We dont know preexisting conditions,and people selling MMS on their cruse vacations? Who are these people?, and where are they? And I think Jim Humble should sue the falls accusers.
By: Gilgamesh on October 18, 2009
at 8:33 am
Adam, I cannot ignore the following quote, because it is Jim attacking a grieving man – using a lie.
QUOTE FROM JIM:
“Then if Mr. Nash had of checked just a little bit of the chemistry, because the data is readily available, he would have found that MMS is a natural chemical manufactured by the human immune system to help prevent diseases and to keep the body healthy.”
Here’s the TRUE part: Oxidizers are produced by immune cells (as are acids and bacteriocidal enzymes).
Here’s the sneaky LIE part: These tissue destroying substances are NOT released into circulation. Never. It does not happen.
Oxidizers like CLO2 are stored WITHIN the immune cells.
The immune cells engulf the organism and expose it to these highly toxic chemicals within special compartmets INSIDE the cell.
This protects our normal cells from being killed.
Once in a while these oxidizers are released directly on a bacteria. When this happens your normal cells in the area can get killed – as in collateral damage.
I’ll state this again – the immune cells do not release chlorine dioxide (or any oxidizng agent) into circulation.
Want to witness the effects of the immune cells releasing oxidizing agents and enzymes on normal tissue. Ever hear of “flesh eating bacteria”. Wrong name. Because the so-called flesh eating bacteria are NOT eating anything. It’s actually the persons IMMUNE cells over-reacting to the bacteria and destroying healthy tissue. And using chlorine and oxygen (oxidizers) to do it!
As stated endless times, injested CLO2 will react with normal tissues long before it even passess through the stomach into circulation. That’s what ALL oxidizing agents do.
I wanted to believe Jim Humble was simply ignorant of physiology. It’s easy to get things mixed up – I know, I’ve taught immunology and microbiology.
However, Jim seems to know quite a bit of self-serving chemistry, and some rather carefully chosen aspects of physiology.
By: palpable on October 19, 2009
at 9:16 pm
I agree with Jim Humble, Mr Nash should be investigated, and the people who sold the MMS to them.If they were selling MMS on their cruse vacation, what kind of MMS they sold?,Home made MMS? They made it at home in the basement?
This story is not right. And it is a false accusation, and Jim should sue this false accuser.
By: Gilgamesh on October 19, 2009
at 10:22 pm
Palpable,
First –
Before I decided to take MMS, I came across two references which
seemed compelling to me. Perhaps you could comment on the
“mechanisms” described by these Scientists, and how they differ
from what Jim Humble is saying.
The chlorine is biocidal, yet less effective against pathogens than chlorine dioxide since it is a less powerful oxidant in the ionic form. At the pH of the stomach (pH 3-4) one can expect chlorine dioxide to be produced from the chlorides. This will be a transient phenomenon ultimately yielding chlorine ion again. This will be absorbed by the body, passed through the lower intestinal tract and excreted by the kidneys. If a substantial dose of S.O. has been taken one could hypothesize that the chlorine and chlorine dioxide would act against any pathogenic microorganisms in the body. This may explain the increase in the efficiency of the enzymes known as peroxidases which are a important component in the immune system since they are involved in the oxidation of foreign material such as viruses and toxins. Our experiments with Stabilised Oxygen were modeled after the work of Dr. Lowell P. Hager at the University of Illinois on chlorine and our results support his findings. That Stabilised Oxygen or the chlorine it contains significantly improves the efficiency of the two enzymes chloroperoxidase and peroxidase. The reactions of another model system utilizing myeloperoxidase and peroxidase in the leukocytes is shown to increase the activity of this enzyme.
Additionally, Dr. Anderson Peoples, Professor of Pharmacology, University of California wrote of the Stabilised Oxygen as follows: I have concluded that as a bactericide and or fungicide, it works primarily on the basis of oxidation, apparently able to supply stimulus to the organism’s own physiological response as well as offering oxidative capacity at a cellular level.
His report concludes with the following statement :
We consider the Stabilised Oxygen where utilised in vivo, combines with the natural body functions and immune responses to become an effective medication with virtually no toxicity or side effects.
Dr. Hesselink’s description of the chemistry of MMS. He endorses
Jim Humble’s claims completely:
http://mmsmedicalresearch.com/
Second -
You tell us that you are an educator and you come up with a bunch of
statements about what can and cannot happen in the body, yet you
write under a pseudonym and give us no biographical information to
substantiate the validity of your claims. You sound credible, but hey -
many clever people can do that.
I guess it is bothering me that no one has put your claims to rest…I
think it is important for us to achieve some resolution on what you are
saying….at least it is important to me.
Thank you for your reply.
By: Quantum Girl on November 4, 2009
at 4:50 pm
To Quantum Girl;
Jim Humbles’ Dr Hesselinks agrees with me.
DR. HESSELINK’S DESCRIPTION OF THE CHEMISTRY OF MMS
http://bioredox.mysite.com/CLOXhtml/CLOXilus.htm
“On The Mechanisms Of Toxicity Of Chlorine Oxides Against Malarial Parasites – An Overview”.
QUOTE FROM ARTICLE on MECHANISM OF CLO2
“This procedure rapidly eliminates malaria and other infectious agents in only one dose. Chlorine dioxide (ClO2) is highly reactive with thiols (RSH), polyamines, purines, certain amino acids and iron, all of which are necessary for the growth and survival of pathogenic microbes.”
ME: Guess What? All the above molecules (thiols (RSH), polyamines, purines, certain amino acids and iron) are found in the human body and are just as necessary for our survival and growth! Therefore CLO2 must oxidize our tissues. That’s what I’ve been saying all along.
Jim Humbles Doctor is stating what I have stated over and over.
Oxidizers react with all organic molecules. We share very class of organic molecules with bacteria.
Jim says CLO2 searches out only bad molecules. His doctor disagrees.
BERG QUOTE:
“That Stabilised Oxygen or the chlorine it contains significantly improves the efficiency of the two enzymes chloroperoxidase and peroxidase. The reactions of another model system utilizing myeloperoxidase and peroxidase in the leukocytes is shown to increase the activity of this enzyme”
ME: I like this one. Its actually proposing a mechanism. The proposed mechanisms is immune stimulation. Causing your immune cells to make bacteriocidal substances. However the mechanism is still not really spelled out. In his full article he states these are theoretical mechanisms.
QUOTE FROM ARTICLE:
“However, the available data on chlorite is limited. Therefore, only the three aforementioned mechanisms have been proposed.”
ME: One problem is that this particular article is 21 years old. I saw no follow ups on use or studies. If this was such a great thing, why didn’t this prominent researcher follow up? Truly curious.
As I’ve explained before, The hypochlorous acid (MMS2) Humble is now touting is kept within immune cells – it is not in circulation as jim has alluded to.
So nothing has changed for me. No one has put my claims (and read them carefully – on the other blog) to rest.
The below are a few of Humbles stated claims and they are false (especially the first one):
1)That CLO2 can search out and oxidized harmful cells/organisms without also oxidizing your cells/tissues
2)Cancers cells are anaerobic
3)Viruses are anaerobic
4)Bad bacteria are only anaerobic
Who I am, or who Jim is, or who you are, is irrelevant.
Scientific arguments stand on the science, not the individual.
The only reason I gave any biographical info, was because most posters were attacking my motivations, rather than addressing my points.
By: palpable on November 4, 2009
at 11:11 pm
When I first read this man (Mr.Nash) story. It did not sound like a grieving man. His story was too well orchestrated and did not sound any sadness except slander and blame. I had my husband read his story and his first impression was the same and suggested “Big Pharma” is behind this story to help squash MMS. Big Pharma is threatened by MMS no doubt. But, maybe it is not, maybe it is someone who is playing a game. I have not started on MMS when I read Mr. Nash’s story. I AM ON MMS AND HAVE TAKEN 2 DROPS, I AM STILL ALIVE and I will continue to take it. God Bless you Jim Humble for your sharing and saving lives.
By: Lori on October 23, 2009
at 10:56 pm
I’m glad we have the freedom to discuss things on the Internet. While I doubt there is any way to find out the “what really happened” facts of Sylvie’s situation, I know that it is possible to be “allergic” to just about anything in this world.
I know there are MMS users who do muscle testing before taking MMS (and other things). I think this is an excellent policy to follow.
I’d like to add that there are permanent solutions to these “allergies.” So even if an individual is indeed overly sensitive to MMS, it is possible to have non-invasive treatments done to teach the body to stop over-reacting. While there are an increasing number of variations available, the one that I have experienced and benefitted from (and subsequently trained in) is called NAET. Dr. Devi Nambudripad is another individual who, like Jim Humble, found a surprising solution to her own health dilemma and has been developing and refining it for 25 years now. You can find a practitioner near you by checking her website at http://www.naet.com.
Again, while I don’t know what happened with Doug Nash’s wife, occasionally allergic responses can devastating and life-threatening. And sensitivities can develop in ways that people don’t always expect, as well.
I have used MMS myself. Besides recommending muscle testing and (if needed) resolution of hypersensitivity with NAET/NAET-type approaches, I agree with and endorse the directions to go slowly when dosing. I also agree with the warnings that you must be well hydrated in order to minimize the unpleasant side effects of toxins released by dying pathogens. Alkalizing the body with supplements like Megahydrate, alkaline ionized water or pure water with some bicarb added can help with those symptoms even more.
By: Laure on October 28, 2009
at 11:52 am
Hi Palpable,
Thank you for the response.
Dr. Hesselink is not Humble’s doctor, he is a Medical Doctor teaching Pre-Med at the University level. He is interested in furthering Science.
Do not expect people on this forum to be Scientists. If you want to HELP, go debate on Scientific forums, then come back and provide UNDERSTANDABLE information to the general public.
If you are going to use your knowledge to discourage people from doing something that could potentially reduce their suffering, then I think it would be responsible for you to openly reveal your credentials as Berg and Hesselink have done. That is what the lay public relies on, since we are not doctors.
I am sticking with Hesselink. He states:
Chlorine dioxide (ClO2) has been proven to be cidal to almost all known infectious agents in vitro using remarkably low concentrations. This includes parasites, fungi, bacteria and viruses. The experiences noted above imply that this compound is tolerable orally at effective concentrations. Therefore extensive research is warranted to determine if acidified sodium chlorite is effective in treating other infections. We may be on the verge of discovering the most potent and broad spectrum antimicrobial agent yet known. Special thanks go to Jim Humble for his willingness to share his discovery with the world.
Both Berg and Hesslink indicate it appears to be non-toxic, which suggests to me that there is a difference between the way in which healthy tissue and pathogens are oxidized. Humble points out the Oxygen is a powerful oxidizer, yet obviously, we are not damaged by normal doses!
By the way, after 10 days of MMS taken as directed, I feel like a million bucks! And my Quantum Biofeedback Practitioner says the Chronic Fatigue Virus that we have had such a hard time getting rid of through herbs and homeopathics, is for the FIRST time, resonating within normal range. I think THAT is exciting.
By: Quantum Girl on November 5, 2009
at 7:17 am
Congrats on the improvement of your health! I am so happy for you. I’m sure it’s like getting a new lease on your life. My father had a similar life-altering improvement through his use of MMS. I agree that Palpable’s comments belong to a debate forum, not a site which is read by lay people who will rely more on anecdotal reports than a chemistry lesson.
By: CdnFarmgirl on November 5, 2009
at 9:03 am
To Quantum Girl;
Have you not read my posts on Adams other blog? (where this discussion started).
Below is the link.
http://phaelosopher.wordpress.com/2008/04/28/mms-skeptics-view-with-reply-by-jim-humble/
I think they are clear. I’m done with repeating the specifics over and over.
Your response is confusing – you post scientific articles, and at the same time say I should debate elswhere, and that I shouldn’t expect people to be scientists. Then you post more science. Which is it? Do you want to talk science or not?
As far as credentials? Jim was a gold miner. Yet I don’t discuss his credentials.
Your current science supports my position.
QUOTE:
“Chlorine dioxide (ClO2) has been proven to be cidal to almost all known infectious agents IN VITRO using remarkably low concentrations”.
DEFINTION: A procedure performed IN VITRO(Latin: within the glass) is performed not in a living organism but in a controlled environment, such as in a test tube.
Not in a living body. That’s the whole point.
No argument here that organisms are killed my CLO2 (as in water purification). Because it is an oxidizer and Oxidizers, oxidize everything.
QUOTE:
“Both Berg and Hesslink indicate it appears to be non-toxic, which suggests to me that there is a difference between the way in which healthy tissue and pathogens are oxidized. ”
ME: The above is Incorrect.
1) Non-Toxic: If it is non-toxic, then why not take as much as possible. Why is it suggested to start on small doses, or there may be problems.
All scientific information states that CLO2 is a toxin. So dose is important – because it oxidizes normal tissue. Its ability to oxidize makes it a toxin.
Everyone arguing against the above cannot have it both ways.
2) Oxidation: Please find some literature on how pathogens are oxidized in a different way than our cells.
You will not. Oxidation is oxidation.
How do you think our immune cells get rid of our dead and dying cells? By Using the same oxidizers as they use on pathogens.
As stated by Hesslink – CLO2 oxidizes amino acids and polyamines.
Do you get that all organisms use the same 20 amino acids to make all proteins (we are 50% protein).
And polyamines means DNA, and that all DNA in ALL organisms is formed by the same polyamines.
I’m going to make it simple. This is where I started.
Argue this point.
I say: No Oxidizer can selectively react with pathogens, and not react with normal tissues.
As far as your success – If you read my first post, you will see I stated “if it works do it”
So good luck.
However if your did read my first posts, I say I am a beiever in ” use it if it works”. So if it works for you – use it.
By: palpable on November 5, 2009
at 9:52 am
Hi Palpable,
I will be simple as well:
Why would Hesselink and Berg say something is non-toxic? What do they have to gain by this?
Is table salt toxic if ingested in high doses?
How about an herb, like Kava Kava?
How about alcohol?
What about oxygen? I really would like you to
address this one.
Seems to me dose determines toxicity in many cases.
Why don’t YOU present your argument to Hesselink and others? That is what I would do if
I had information that I thought was important to the health and safety of the public. You are more likely to be able to debate and question than i.
It comes down to: Are you here to help or hinder? Creating doubt and skepticism is not in itself helpful.
i posted articles for the sake of the public reading this, and to see if you would provide additional understanding.
Listen – I think you sound like a smart, well-intentioned guy…I just don’t think you are being helpful. Humble is on to something…if it needs to be improved…let’s do it…if there needs to be more warnings….let’s do it….if there needs to be more studies…let’s do it.
By: Quantum Girl on November 5, 2009
at 11:51 am
Quantum girl, I think we have come to complete agreement. All those substances can be toxic.
Although each has a different mechanism to do so.
So I too wonder – Why anyone would say CLO2 is non-toxic?
I’m not sure what you are looking for when you say address this?
But….
Table salt in high concentration – kills most microbes. Drink a glass of it and water, and you will vomit. Does that mean you should injest a lot of it and it will kill pathogens?
O2 breathed in at 100% concentration can cause lung damage over time. Will excess O2 search out microbes anfd kill them?
Alcohol is used to sterilize surfaces because it kills many microbes. If you drink a lot……will it search out microbes in the body and not affect you the consumer?
See a theme here
Since we are asking questions, its your turn. With your above examples in mind. Tell me how they differ from CLO2?
How can CLO2 not affect normal tissue.
By: palpable on November 5, 2009
at 1:58 pm
palpable.
I think I m more amazed with DMSO, than MMS.
DMSO is a very powerful, industrial solvent, it will desolve all organic materials, it will strip off the paint of the car, and everything, but will not harm the human cells in us. And DMSO heals all kinds of medical conditions in people, and animals, people use it topically, they use it as injections , and in IV,s. And it keeps the transplant organs live for transplant.
So far the mechanism, how this work is not explained.
In my Opinion maybe you can explain how DMSO work, or not work.
And if you can do that, I m sure you can also explain how MMS works.
You always explain how it is impossible for it work,but try to explain why it works for thousand of people who use it. Jim Humble explain the mechanism
how MMS work, but if this is only his theory, and not the real mechanism, maybe you could explain the real machanism, how it works.
By: Gilgamesh on November 5, 2009
at 4:36 pm
Let’s be clear in each of the above examples, that these things DO NOT harm healthy tissue in low dose.
http://www.epa.gov/ogwdw000/mdbp/pdf/alter/chapt_4.pdf
EPA article states that Chlorine Dioxide is a “selective oxidizer.” I have now read that in 3 articles describing the chemistry of MMS.
Again, I’m not the best one to be in this discussion (with my high school chemistry background). I just know what makes sense to me. It sounds like it has to do with electrical potential and ph.
By: Quantum Girl on November 5, 2009
at 2:21 pm
Palpable,
The issue for me, and hopefully for others, has been put to rest.
Research suggests that MMS is a Non-toxic substance when used as directed, and works chemically as Jim Humble describes.
It is unfortunate that bold claims against scientific progress are made without thorough research….especially when they attempt to defame the character of good soldiers, like Jim Humble, who want nothing more than to bring effective, low-cost, easy to administer SOLUTIONS to pain and suffering.
I am now more convinced than ever, so I ENCOURAGE you all to explore MMS as potentially the most exciting Wellness development of our time.
And thank you to Adam for this forum and ALL of his wonderful work!!
By: Quantum Girl on November 6, 2009
at 8:05 am