Dr. Tom Cowan on the Use of Chlorine Dioxide, Ozone, Methylene Blue, Carbon 60 (C60), Zeolite & Turpentine in the Context of “New Biology”

Dr. Tom Cowan on the Use of Chlorine Dioxide, Ozone, Methylene Blue, Carbon 60 (C60), Zeolite & Turpentine in the Context of “New Biology”

by Dr. Tom Cowan
video recorded March 13, 2024

 

A Discussion on Chlorine Dioxide, Ozone and Methylene Blue – 3/13/24

Video available at Dr. Tom Cowan Rumble & Odysee channels.

 

Truth Comes to Light editor’s note:

Below you will find some excerpts from Tom Cowan’s presentation. For additional details on any of the protocols he mentions, listen to the full video. The first part of the video covers the recently renewed “no virus” challenge. At approximate 18 minutes in, he begins to discuss the protocols mentioned in the title. Emphasis (bold) is mine. ~ Kathleen

 

 

Excerpts: 

So, a lot of people have asked, and they’ve heard me mention and talk about in the New Biology Clinic (practitioners), a number of medicines, or so-called medicines — and they are rightfully so, the people, wondering how these fit into New Biology principles, because some of them are so-called natural substances, but some of them are actually what you would call chemicals.

So the list includes chlorine dioxide, or chlorine dioxide solution, and methylene blue, ozone, turpentine, C-carbon, zeolite, and there’s probably others.

And so there’s a lot of controversy, I think, within our group as to, well, everything from ‘these are amazing healing substances which everyone should have in their therapeutic handbag’…

[…]

And another position is, ‘I would never use something like those, because they’re basically chemicals’ — or ‘Maybe they’re from natural things, but they can only repress symptoms and anyways aren’t they meant to kill organisms like viruses and bacteria and fungi? And I thought that we’re not about killing stuff, because all these organisms are really out there to help us.’

So I thought I would take a look at that and give us a certain point of view that hopefully will make this question easier to understand and maybe hope give us some guidance on this…

[…]

So, let’s look at the first one which was chlorine dioxide. And not so long ago we had a conversation with Andreas Kalcker who I would say probably knows more about the use of chlorine dioxide than anybody else alive right now.

[Here Tom reads descriptions of what chlorine dioxide is and shares one of several protocols available for preparing and using it.]

So, what is it doing?

So if we, (and I would say this was more or less in agreement with what Andreas was telling us in our our conversation with him) that basically chlorine dioxide is a charge, or what he would call electron donor.

Now, that already is a little bit problematic in a sense… because we’re taught, and we’ve gone through what does it mean to be an oxygen donor. So we talked about Gerald Pollock’s very interesting research that we don’t actually absorb oxygen from the air. What we absorb and in his view were electrons.

I would actually change the word of electrons, since as I’ve been over, if you look at the model of the atom that we’re told, which is that the atom has a nucleus with protons and neutrons and then has electrons circling around it. So, basically a make-believe model…

[…]

And I think the word calling something a negative charge is an inappropriate terminology. So it’s not a negative charge, but it’s a certain kind of charge, which is opposite or different than other kinds of charge, which we call positive charge.

And that gets into a little bit of semantics. So let’s just say that the reason we need oxygen is because oxygen is a strong donor of the charge, which is what we need to produce energy and to create actually life.

So now we’re talking about a fundamentally different view of what a living system is, or even what substance is.

And I think what I’m talking about is at the end of the day, and the bottom line is, we have a very unclear and primitive and unformed, and I would even use the word ‘incorrect’. about what physical substance actually is.

So we know, for instance, with very clear experiments and accurate measurements. that if you shine a coherent beam of light into a very thin layer of some solid object like gold or silver or something, that 99% of the volume of that silver sheet or gold sheet, the light will go through unimpeded as if there is nothing there.

In other words, 99% of the area of a solid substance like a sheet of gold, there’s nothing there.

Now that led them to create the model that there’s these atoms linked together and they have nuclei. And what’s circling around them is electrons. And then there’s other people who dispute that. I’ve gone over that. And they say that that little part, that less than 1% that actually scatters the light (that’s the only part that scatters the light) that is the whole atom.

Now, whichever those two it is, you’re still left with the question of how come this chair or this desk or this sheet of very thin gold feels, seems, appears, and by every sensory observation appears to be a solid structure.

It’s not made of 99% of nothing. So even if it’s a nucleus that’s less than 1% of the mass, or even if it’s the whole atom that’s less than 1% of the mass, either way, you’re left with the dilemma of: So what is it made of?

And that includes us. So what are we made of? It appears that we’re not made of substance, because that doesn’t make any sense at all.

So we’re essentially made of charge. We’re like a battery. And we use certain processes to recharge our battery.

Interestingly, if you look at the work of Wilhelm Reich and others, you know, the whole phenomena of sexual activity and orgasm is a simply a way to recharge your battery. It’s an interesting way of looking at it. And connecting with the sun and the earth is another fundamental polarity that recharges our battery. And breathing in the air is a way of absorbing the some charge that we erroneously or (some other word) call oxygen.

So we’re actually absorbing charge from the sort of plasma or ether field around us. And that is what gives us life.

As well as exposure to the sun and the earth, which creates a fundamental polarity of the earth donating so-called negative charges, which again isn’t really a negative charge, and the sun donating a sort of positive charge. This is the male/female polarity, which also comes to a sort of fruition, like I said, in this sexual act.

So it’s possible, and I think the real way to understand what chlorine dioxide does, is it’s simply a molecule that has been somehow configured to be a very strong donor of this so-called electronegative or polar charge.

And since, in a sense, the root of all disease is a loss of the charge and your battery is running down and becoming dead, you can understand why giving somebody a very strongly donating substance, like chlorine dioxide, which is exactly how Andreas Kalcker described it to us — it has a very strong ability to donate this electronegative so-called charge, and therefore promote healing.

Now, it looks like that it kills bacteria or viruses or fungi, but that itself is an illusion because it’s not killing anything.

What it’s doing, like Florence Nightingale said, this decay process is a function of your battery running out. So if you allow — if you donate this charge and sort of recharge your battery, then the tissue stops decaying, and your decay process, once it stops, then the bacteria don’t have to come to feed off the decay.

And that which we erroneously call viruses which are just a misunderstanding of these decaying particles that are coming from your tissue, they obviously stop or are lessened.

And so you think you’ve killed the virus or killed the bacteria when you’ve done no such thing. You’ve actually restored the health of the tissue. And then the bacteria don’t need to feed off the decaying tissue, and there’s no viruses that are produced.

They’re not actually viruses anywhere. There’s only decaying tissue.

The fungi go away because they don’t have to eat up your decaying tissue to help you out, and then you seem a whole lot better.

Now, I think if you frame it like that, then you have a realistic understanding.

I’m not saying that I or anybody else knows… I mean, we still have this fundamental sort of dilemma of how electromagnetic phenomena, waves, frequencies, create a solid stuff called ‘you’.

I don’t know how that happens, but I know that that seems to be all we’re actually made of or all anything is made of, because the particles have been shown not to exist, and the electromagnetic waves and frequencies have.

So that’s what this world, this universe that we’re living in is made of, so we might as well accept that, and we might as well work with it.

Now, here’s the bottom line. If you think like this and understand the world in this way, and then you don’t want to end up having to use a chemical substance like chlorine dioxide, you would understand that a better strategy is to reserve your charge through eating living food, and through regular constant movement (not constant, but regular movement) in the outdoors, in the sunshine with bare feet or somehow connected to the earth, and to avoid toxic radiation fields or electromagnetic fields as much as possible.

Use other grounding devices and other tools like seawater and other plants and other extracts and other things, breathing better to do harmonious breathing or the breathing that we’re teaching in the clinic, or the Wim Hof breathing.

All these are regular normal ways that you can preserve your health so that you don’t need to get into the position of ‘now I have this horrible, quote, urine infection, and I need to do something right away’.

Now, having said that, and having worked almost four decades as a doctor, I don’t particularly have a problem with using a very safe substance, which is what all these appear to be, like chlorine dioxide solution, to temporarily relieve somebody suffering who’s got urinary tract infection, or a whole lot worse.

I mean, every illness, so-called, is a manifestation of decay and poisoning and a loss of charge, and in particular this loss of charge due to exposure to electropositive toxic substances in our world.

And so, if you can, in addition, and I would be very clear, in addition or on top of doing all the other things, like the food and the movement and the sunshine, and the, you know, not succumbing to repeated negative thought pattern and all the other things, and using, you know, other breathing techniques that help you put you in a state where you’re charged and working on your intimate relationships so you can recharge your battery, all these things, that should be first.

But again, I have no problem with somebody using chlorine dioxide solution in the way that I just described to help them out, because I see very little downside reported or something that I’ve observed…

[…]

I think the more important principle is to understand what it’s doing, which I think I have just described. Then you can see how it fits in, and that it is a wonderful and appropriate tool to help us out, as we’re also doing all the things to regain our charge.

Now, interestingly, if we go to the next one, which is methylene blue, which I never even heard of until maybe a few months ago, you find almost the same thing…

[…]

So when you realize that this substance has been effectively used to treat this and works in a reductive sort of way similar to how oxygen works, you start realizing…that this is a oxygen, i.e. a charge donor.

And it just happens to be a different chemical, which happens to, for whatever kind of molecular (it’s the wrong word, probably) reason, able to donate charge more effectively than most other things, you could see why it has become an interesting treatment for all sorts of degenerative neurodegenerative disease, particularly memory problems, depression, Parkinson’s pain, Alzheimer’s, all these things, which are basically just a losing of the of the electrical charge in the deepest, most profound area where the charge has to work, which is our nervous system.

It does this in the same way that oxygen would, but in this case, as they say, the oxygen therapy isn’t strong enough. So there happens to be this chemical, which seems to have very low or almost no toxicity that is able to strongly donate a negative charge and make a seemingly dramatic difference in people suffering from these sorts of conditions.

Now, again, I haven’t used it and maybe somebody will convince me that there is some negative effects from this. There may be that I couldn’t find any documentation of this so far…

[…]

One of the places I think we need to be sure I know they use methylene blue also widely with animal medicine with good effects. And there is some concern that some of the methylene blue that’s sold over the Internet is not really methylene blue. And so I would be careful about that. One place that I know you can get it that claims that it’s exactly the same chemical and they put it in structured water and they put some so-called healing frequencies is a website onlyresultscount.com. And they have a fairly inexpensive product, which you can easily get and they have a lot of directions on how to use it…

[…]

So I have some other things here like ozone, but I think you can start to see that there’s a pattern here. So ozone is just adding extra oxygen, which is adding another form of delivering this that oxygen provides to us, which is this so-called electronegative charge, which is the reason we’re sick in the first place…

[…]

Turpentine, we’ve been over a fair amount, and I would refer you to the interview that I did with our friend Andy Kaufman and the work of Jennifer Daniels…

I’m not aware of any analogy you could make with restoring the charge. But my guess is if you really looked into it, you would find something like that as well….

Zeolite and Carbon C60 seem to be things that have negative charge or a certain structure that helps to bind with these positively charged so-called toxins. You know, Andreas Kalker essentially made the comment that every toxic substance is basically a positively charged molecule. I’m not sure if that’s true, but Carbon C60 is these sort of buckyball things which is loaded with these negative charges which attracts this toxic stuff and essentially captures them inside the carbon structure and allows your body to eliminate them. The same thing with zeolite. There’s of course many arguments about what form of zeolite and how to use it…

[…]

I think all these things are interesting and positive approaches to the question of what it all boils down to is how can we help detoxify and how can we help prevent our tissues from decaying.

And that has all goes back to we’re essentially like a living battery. And our living battery is charged through the food and through the way we think and through connection with movement and through connection with the sun and the earth…

 

Connect with Dr. Tom Cowan