Beforehand I thank those who can correct mistakes in
grammar!!!
Why TREATMENT by fats is not
APPLIED?
In what the cause of originating of
the given question? In the personal plan of any
doubts does not arise; as new own hypothesis about an etiopathogenesis
of a tuberculosis just also is based that the tuberculosis is not a infectious
disease which arises not because of a lesion of an organism a micobacterium; and disease which results from originating
in specific cells of an organism of process of an irreciprocal
defatting. I.e., the
tuberculosis is a process of an irreciprocal defatting of cellular structure.
In an official phthisiology
already for a long time experts came to a common opinion that treatment by fats noneffectively. As scientists mark, hundreds years was considered curative the dog
and badger fat's. But the scientific substantiation of such treatment is not
present. Experts unanimously consider that domestic agents for treatment of tubercular
patients have been generated by the last powerlessness of medicine when aspired
though somehow to help patients. Not clearly, why they hide the facts of
demonstrative treatment by fats?
Experiments
on immediate effect of fats on a micobacterium
repeatedly confirmed (this fact it is impossible to deny), that fats on a micobacterium do not render any
amazing influence. In this connection, scientists do a unequivocal conclusion that
treatment by fats noneffectively; and he cannot be
recommended to application as it not amazes a micobacterium.
In March, 2005 to me is refused in the publication of
article "That represents tubercular process?" on the establishment of
the review which to me was given by I.B.Bjalik, the
main scientific employee of Institute of a phthisiology
and pulmonology of Ukraine, the doctor of
medical sciences, the professor. And so in the review he speaks: "It is
impossible to agree with the author about perspectivity
of creation and application of preparations on the basis of fats for treatment
of patients by tuberculosis. Experience of application of various fats for
treatment of patients by tuberculosis in up-to - antibacterial the season has shown their inefficiency. And only
antibacterial antitubercular preparations have
resulted in cardinal enriching treatment of tuberculosis; have allowed curing
hundred thousand and millions patients with tuberculosis all over the world
".
Therefore I did not have question which stands in the
title. Today I am ready to prove experimentally efficacyy
treatment by fats, but it while to whom from experts it is not necessary. It is
very a pity, that such known scientist as I.B.Bjalik,
holds back that in a medical science exist real proofs
of effective treatment of a tuberculosis fats.
In truly
the fine statement proves to be true: - "For
all - its time". And, not so long ago, in February,
Viennese university, the native of
Why I to concentrate attention on Charles Trincher's activity? He worked there where it was thrown
with destiny. Once the great scientist, being in the reference, has got to work
as the phthisiatrician when the tuberculosis
frequently resulted in lethal diseases; and him everything, even physicians,
very much were afraid.
He writes
that at that time effective medicines yet were not; and it was necessary, as
well as to all experts, to use a method of a pheumothorax;
essentially having changed him. Trincher created then
to an essence new procedure. And then this procedure has yielded the results.
But not this its main.
Charles Trincher writes: "I certainly was interested in everything,
that concerned this illness. And my attention has involved how she was
treated by local residents. They ate fats of badger or the dog. Superstition? In that and matter, that is not present! We together with the roentgenologist with
amazement surveyed roentgenogrames of lungs: huge,
simply terrible cavities, but absolutely sterile! In what the cause? What mechanism of this phenomenon?
". It was the fact real treatment of fats.
The scientist began to be engaged in search of the answer
to this question. And in a result he managed to establish, that one of acids in
structure of dog and badger fats on constitution reminded frame of a fatty acid
which is present at a membrane of a tubercular bacterium. And Charles Trincher (on the foundation of the infectious theory and
the received results) has drawn a conclusion: - "the Silly bacterium is
mistaken. Resemblance in a constitution forces her to eat an
"another's" acid. She eats and dies! ".
I.e. fats amaze a bacterium.
These researches have allowed to solve and many other
problems. He also will assume that Adepses (fats) in
lungs serve as power fuel. Completely I support this conclusion. But about it
separate conversation is necessary.
And so, K.Trincher's
the greatest merit that he experimentally and has demonstratively confirmed
efficacyy of treatment with Adepses of a tuberculosis. And he
has made it still in a up to - antibacterial epoch.
But thus the essential error has not given life to results of his researches. In what the error of the great scientist consist?
First,
having seen a certain reality in experiment and in real life at treatment of
tubercular patients, namely, that treatment by fats results in convalescence;
he (as well as other phthisiatricians) has failed to
depart the accepted and recognized views on an etiopathogenesis
of tuberculosis, as infectious disease.
Becomes
obvious, K.Trincher has decided, - The exciter of a tuberculosis is a micobacterium.
And if there is a real convalescence; that it means, that fats somehow amaze
bacteria of tuberculosis. And the hypothesis about a silly bacterium was born.
And in a
consequence many scientific (followers), repeatedly having checked up influence
of fats on a micobacterium; have received convincing
proofs of that fats are not capable to amaze a micobacterium.
And the most important, that these scientists as are right. Why nobody
notices, what in 50 of the last century scientists have denied not K.Trincher's result - the fact of treatment by fats, but only
his conclusion? Thus, results of the subsequent experiments of scientists have proved
exclusively an incompetence of a conclusion K.Trincher's
that fats are amazed a micobacteria.
And by the way, at the end of 2003 scientists of
And when
the first tubercular preparations have appeared; successful cases of
convalescence began to attribute to appearance of antitubercular
preparations. But nobody to draw attention to what can the
cause of convalescence is concluded in other? The "Imaginary" success antibacterial preparations
has forced to forget successful cases of treatment by fats. Just today's
burst with new force of a tuberculosis (and with more serious forms), and
originating of this disease at categories of persons which do not fall under
the infectious theory, convincingly shows ostensibility
of success of antitubercular therapy. And today forms
of tuberculosis appear, at which Kokhs bacillus is
not found out at all.???
How to be
with such contradictions: On the one hand patients really recovered from a tuberculosis by means of
fats (and it is the fact), and on the other hand fats do not blast a micobacterium?
And the
cause just consists in that; that the incorrect view on an etiopathogenesis of a
tuberculosis (standard) also resulted to that; what the real results which
attained in experiment, and in treatment, do not coincide with the infectious
theory of a tuberculosis. And as the new theory does
not exist, on everyone try on the old theory: the tuberculosis is a infectious disease, and
his exciter a micobacterium. It the basic error.
As follows from other stuffs of a site, today it is
possible to prove a opulence of a new hypothesis: - "Tuberculosis
is not a infectious disease, the tuberculosis is a process of an irreversible defatting of specific cells of an organism". For acknowledgement of a new view series of demonstrative experiments
are developed; and unfortunately, which yet do not invoke in anybody interest.
In the attitude of treatment by fats experiments also are necessary;
because many prescriptions are lost.
It would be desirable to note especially:
do
not hasten to be treated by fats yourselves; to not do much harm to itself, or
to be disabused in something. Just failures (and their majority) consist that
treatment by fats very much and is very specific. The tuberculosis is complex
and not simple disease. To each patient the individual approach is necessary
only.
2006