Koch maintained that for a specific bacteria to be the cause of a disease:
- It must be found in every case of that disease.
This is not found.
- It must not be found when the disease is not present.
This is not so.
- It must be capable of living outside the tissues.
That viruses and bacteria can live outside the body is unproven.
- The bacteria must then be capable of reintroduction into the organism and producing that disease.
These postulates do not apply to bacteria. As has been repeatedly demonstrated, specific bacteria do not fulfill these prerequisites.
- A culture of the bacteria must be taken from a diseased animal.
- It must then be grown in pure culture in a laboratory.
- After this, the culture has to be injected into a susceptible* animal.
- It must cause the same disease, and culture must be taken from this animal.
This is a modification of the germ theory, requiring a condition of susceptibility* to establish a causal relationship between specific germs and specific diseases. Without that condition, a germ can not be said to cause disease.
Postulate #1 Disproven
Scientists know that specific bacteria are not found in every case of a specific disease. The eminent Canadian physician, Sir William Osier (1849-1919) found that the diphtheria bacillus is absent in 28 to 40% of cases of diphtheria. Green's Medical Diagnosis says that tubercle bacilli may be present early, more often late, or in rare instances be absent throughout the disease condition. Koch's first postulate, "the specific bacteria must be found in every case of that disease" is not fulfilled in tuberculosis, diphtheria, typhoid fever, pneumonia, or any other disease. Specific bacteria are not found in every case of a specific disease.
Postulate #2 Disproven
Nor is the second postulate fulfilled, because it is a medically-known fact that bacteria are found in the bodies of humans and animals which exhibit no symptoms of any disease. Specific bacteria are repeatedly found when the specific disease is absent.
Postulate #3 Disproven
Further, bacteria are not capable of living outside the tissues; therefore, the third postulate is not fulfilled. Neither Pasteur nor any of his successors have ever induced disease by the inoculation of airborne bacteria, but only by injections from bodily sources. The reason is obvious: germs are dependent on human or animal organisms for their survival.
Postulate #4 Disproven
* "Koch's Fourth Postulate Re- stated reads: Introducing germ cultures in a healthy body or organism does not produce signs and symptoms of the disease.
The Bio-Chemical Society of Toronto conducted a number of very interesting experiments in which pure cultures of typhoid, diphtheria, pneumonia, tuberculosis, and meningitis germs were consumed by the millions in food and drink by a group of volunteers. The results: no ill effects whatsoever." . From "The Germ Theory Reexamined" by Bob Zuraw and Bob Lewanski (Vegetarian World, Volume 3, Number 11, September-November 1977)
But when the condition of susceptibility is introduced, this changes the whole concept. Thus we are back to the same point we have been emphasizing. In other words, although germs may be present in disease, they do not cause disease in every case, Again, the condition of the host is of primary importance in the production of disease.
Of themselves, Germs Are Powerless To Cause Disease
"The germ alone could no more cause disease than a match alone can produce a fire. Just as the fire. If it is to have any part in causing disease, the microbe must find an organism that produces a suitable soil for its activities. We cannot avoid germs. We must be proof against them.
We can avoid disease only by keeping ourselves in the positive state of health such that bacteria are powerless against us." (February 1972, Dr. Shelton 's Hygienic Review),
Numerous experiments have tried to produce various diseases by the feeding of germs, without any disease being produced. Such experiments by the U.S. Navy, again without results.
Dr. Claunch says "These experiments, conducted under test conditions and under government supervision, with such disappointing results, should have knocked the last prop from under the germ theory. They doubtless would have done so if our government doctors had seen fit to make them public property. But alas, they did not. It would have been a great service to the people, but not good business for the doctors and serum manufacturers."Dr. S. K. Claunch, in Exploding the Germ Theory, 2. ibid. P 25