MMS in New Zealand? Say it ain't so.

By Michael Edmonds 14/06/2012 52


Over at Respectful Insolence, blogger Orac has been reporting on the latest outrageous use  of MMS or Miracle Mineral Solution, to treat children with autism by administering it orally and as an enema (see here and here). Fellow sciblogger Alison Campbell has also blogged about this use of MMS.

This got me to wondering if MMS was available in New Zealand, and if so what claims were been attributed to its use.

It took me less than one minute to google the following site.    www.mineralmiracle.co.nz

This website claims that MMS “aids the immune system in curing cancer, AIDS, malaria, hepatitis, leukemia, asthma, flu, cold, arthritis”

Looking at the website there is no evidence to support this. Indeed, the website spends a lot of time going round in circles, trying to prove that MMS is safe, yet capable of treating multiple diseases, and implying that it is a conspiracy to conceal how brilliant a cure it is. The all bluster and no substance type of approach common to most pseudoscientific therapies.

For those that are persuaded of its “effectiveness” it can be purchased at $22 per 100 mL bottle plus $7 p&p.

MMS is made from sodium chlorite, which is one of the components of bleaches such as Janola. These bleaches typically sell at$4 per 2.5 L. I wonder why there is such a price difference?

Looking around the site, it looks like they have rewritten it to get around various regulations, however, I suspect there is still enough misinformation for an Advertising Standards Authority complaint (or 2 or more) to be made against them.


52 Responses to “MMS in New Zealand? Say it ain't so.”

  • yes, well, quackery knows no borders… and my goodness but aren’t they getting a good return on their bleach! Oh, except that its proponents claim that its not bleach at all.

  • It was being sold on TradeMe a few months back just as sodium chlorite with a link within the listing leading to that MMS site, I put in a complaint and they pulled it fairly quickly. They will of course be back when the guard is dropped…

  • Well done Rob. I guess with these people we can’t let our guard down, for a moment. They typically are preying on the desperate and ill informed

    • It’s too bad that people like Rob have to try to enforce their predjudices on others. Are you protecting commercial interests Rob? You can find plenty of evidence of the effectiveness of MMS from users, and don’t demand the impossible “peered review studies”, which will never be published because the journals are controlled by commercial interests. In fact, MMS has been used extensively in Mexico and Africa, and the results are available if you look.
      The medical mafia protects its profits. It kills and maims hundreds of thousands yearly with its toxic drugs. If you want to be useful, warn others about the dangers of paracetamol, statin drugs, or blood pressure compounds. You are either an industry shill , which I suspect, or seriously foolish. BTW, I have a degree in biochemistry and have years of experience that support my comments.

      • Karen

        Your implication that MMS must be effective because it is “used extensively in Mexico and Africa” is flawed. The same argument has been used to support homeopathy – or perhaps you also support homeopathy as a treatment? Have you considered that MMS is used in countries like Mexico and Africa out of desperation, and that those selling it may be taking advantage of such desperation?
        The pharmaceutical industry has made mistakes (some immoral) but this does not mean that there is a “medical mafia”. I find the use of the term “medical mafia” to be very offensive to the many medical professionals who have focused their lives on improving the quality and quantity of life in their patients.
        Also suggesting that someone is an “industry shill” (i.e resorting to name calling) carries very little weight here – it would be better if you tried to justify your claims with some evidence, if you can find some. Surely someone with a biochemistry degree should be able to muster an argument using evidence rather than insults? I am a little surprised that you don’t seem to understand the importance of peer review studies.

        • Michael Edmonds your are so uniformed that’s its dangerous and I think you should open your ears and eyes to the truth of the matter, you mislead people with your ignorance… There is enormous evidence put forward by thousands of people all over the world suing MMS you plonker, so where do you get off on trashing the brilliance of such a simple remedy as this.. Shame on you… Take note from Dr. John Humiston he is also speaking out about this and is getting fantastic results.

          • Dennis,
            If you would care to share some of the “enormous evidence” that you claim shows MMS works then please do so. Otherwise all we have from you is a rude rant which is not very compelling at all.

  • Those using MMS with their autistic children seem to want things both ways. We’re told there’s ‘no safe dose’ for some (many?) of the constituents of the vaccines that they claim caused the autism, yet will happily administer MMS in dosages way above safe levels for sodium chlorite. Similarly, formalin, methanol etc are Ebil despite the fact they’re made in our tissues, while sodium chlorite is perfectly OK because it’s made in our cells. (The fact that our cells carefully compartmentalise it in phagolysosomes because it’s such nasty stuff, seems immaterial.)
    Cognitive dissonance, anyone?

  • It seems to me that the problem with MMS,(as with many other pseudoscientific products) is that when supporters provide “evidence” for it’s use it comes as a series of “facts” which together contradict each other.
    It seems to be a problem with pulling information together and seeing what the overall picture tells us. (or as Alison says cognitive dissonance).

  • >MMS is made from sodium chlorite, which is one of the components of bleaches such as Janola

    So this is a science blog, but you honestly don’t know the difference between NaClO and NaClO2?

    …really?

  • HAVE KNOWLEDGE BEFORE THROWING STONES………

    MMS (drops of chlorine dioxide mixed with water) is not a bleach. Every single chemical known to man can be poisonous when taken in too large of quantities. Recently – a girl died from drinking too much water. Ninety five percent of the medicines known to man are extremely poisonous when used in large quantities. About 15 aspirins can kill a person. One half of a cup of most of the chemicals under your sink would kill a person. I am very very sorry that no scientist or scientific laboratory has ever written up and signed a scientific paper stating that MMS is not a bleach. The fact is, no laboratory ever thought that it would be necessary to come out and say that. It never occurred to any of them that someone would be dumb enough to start calling dilute solutions of chlorine dioxide a bleach. (Industrial strength Chlorine dioxide solutions has absolutely nothing to do with MMS.) MMS is only a few drops of Chlorine dioxide (or even just Sodium chlorite) diluted in plenty of water – it simply does not have the potential to bleach anything at all. That is ridiculous – to push the idea that MMS is a bleach, as no one has ever used MMS for a bleach. Ref. (7)

    However, let me state this: 60% of the water companies in the USA are now using chlorine dioxide to purify drinking water. Chances are very high that if you believe that MMS (again, diluted Chlorine dioxide) is a bleach, then my friend you are now drinking bleach in your own home. Do you think then it is logical, to start a campaign saying; “STOP USING BLEACH TO PURIFY OUR WATER.” Well, the girl that has it figured out and is now telling the world that MMS is bleach, just might start another such campaign with water. I am using a bit of sarcasm here but I hope you understand that someone pushing the idea that MMS is a bleach is highly illogical, and probably wouldn’t state so unless they were paid to do it.

    Sunlight can bleach. Even lemon can bleach. However, we don’t really think of sunlight or lemon as bleach (and certainly not three drops of lemon diluted in a glass of water.) Would you start avoiding the sunlight just because a so called skeptic told you that sunlight is a bleach and therefor bad for you? Or, would you go out and enjoy the sun in moderation as to not get burned? Again, the point of it is: Anything in excess, or anything that is used in too high amount — can be bad for anyone.

    This paper is written for the layman to understand. Sometimes, scientific proof of things exist only in logic. For example, scientists have never come out with a written and signed paper saying that ocean ships don’t fly, or that one cannot fly a Piper Cub to the moon. Many highly obvious things are simply left to logic and there are no scientific papers making many obvious statements. Another example would be that there is no scientific written paper that states that the water will run out of a glass of water if the glass is held upside down. Obvious things are just assumed in this written paper here, and in civilization as a whole. I hope you understand this point, because one woman assumed for some unknown reason that MMS is a bleach – thereby causing irreparable harm to many people by continuing to push the idea, as there will be those with autistic children that will walk away without giving their children a chance to be cured this way.

    What our critics do that makes them dead wrong:
    The critics all make the same mistake. They start talking from a total ignorance of the entire subject of MMS – and what ever it is they think they have found wrong with our handling of MMS. In every case they do much damage when people believe them and go away thinking that MMS doesn’t work. This means that many people lose their chance to overcome their suffering (and possible death), or in the case of autism, they lose their chance to recover their children.

    The worst part is that the critics continue to insist that they are right and they refuse to study the literature concerning the subject. No critic can remain a critic if he studies the subject. The facts are in the chemistry and literature. We work directly with the facts. Why wouldn’t we. Why would we, after a period of 15 years not know the facts.

    I am sorry to say this, but the woman that has been parading out the data and idea that MMS is a bleach, is making those statements like she knows what she is talking about – and therein is the lie. She doesn’t know what she is talking about and thus she is trying to sell us with the idea that her opinion is the truth. And that is the lie. No one has ever used MMS as a bleach, as it cannot possibly bleach anything. But she says everything with such confidence, that she knows when she cannot know. Something that cannot do what a bleach should do, cannot be a bleach. Vinegar is a weak solution of acetic acid, which in much stronger mixtures, is used to clean toilets and other messes. Are we going to say then that vinegar is a toilet cleaner and quit using it for cooking? Likewise baking soda, sodium bicarbonate, is used in small amounts for baking — do we quit using it for baking because it is used in large amounts to clean toilets?

    Chlorine dioxide is used for thousands of things in our society, mostly in industry. It is used in hospitals to sterilize the floors and benches, it is used in stock yards to purify the beef, once slaughtered. It was used in government buildings to kill anthrax. It is used throughout the US to purify water. A search of the literature will turn up hundreds of these things in any city. One of the things is that it might have been used somewhere as an industrial bleach for an industrial process but that would have to be a solution 1000 times stronger than that of MMS. The fact is however, that MMS has never been used in homes anywhere in the world as a bleach of any kind. And so what if it has been used as a bleach — does that somehow change the chemistry of it? Once a critic spends a few hours studying the chemistry of MMS, they simply have to give up being a critic as they find that we remain with the chemistry to the technology. Chemistry is chemistry and the laws of chemistry are often as well defined as gravity. So please, if you know a critic that is unintentionally spreading misinformation, please ask him to spend some time studying the literature – or, the chemistry of chlorine dioxide. It will be good for all of us.

    • Dic,
      Nowhere in your comment do you provide any evidence that MMS has any beneficial effects. Whether it is bleach or not, whether it is diluted or not, there is no evidence that it has any curative properties.
      Given that some of the sites pushing MMS claim that it can help treat everything from AIDS to cancer, without any evidence to support it, such claims are unethical and immoral, particularly when people pay large amounts of money to buy something that because it is so dilute should be very cheap to manufacture.
      Try and defend MMS all you like, anyone with scientific training can see through the film flam used to sell it

  • Michel,
    The fact that mms is not chlorine is explained in full in the article.Did you read it? I have Behçet’s disease which spawned diabetes,arthritis and Psyorisys .All immune deficiency dis-ease.
    I haven’t seen my neutrophil count over 4% in 15 years. After 2 weeks on mms my neutrophil count was 18% . That is half way to normal which is 40-60 % . Your neutrophils surround the pathogen and excrete chlorine dioxide to kill the pathogen . I had no neutrophil’s to speak of so dis-ease ran rampant. Mms gives the body enough chlorine dioxide to take care of the job.
    If you have a intelligent retort please do,but your arrogant bashing is not acceptable even on the Internet.
    Have a good day

  • Michel,

    READ think ….

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodium_chlorite

    First paragraph second sentence ; It is also used for disinfection of a few municipal water treatment plants after conversion to chlorine dioxide.[1]:2 An advantage in this application, as compared to the more commonly used chlorine,

    Alternative to chlorine…….hurm…….alternative…….

  • Michael,

    Dic is cut and pasting from website MMS promotional spiels. He’d do better to check the claims made, rather than offer them uncritically. (More later, it’s late.)

  • Dic,
    MMS is promoted by sites selling it as a “treatment” for a wide variety of diseases, not as a municipal disinfectant, so that example is disingenuous.
    If you can provide evidence that MMS can treat the many diseases these sites claim feel I’d like to see it.

    In terms of alternatives to chlorine and related compounds there are oxygen based disinfectants and bleaches.

  • The long post from Dic is available to be copied and pasted off at least four sites on the internet.

    Only a dick would believe it.

  • Wiki isn’t pro mms. My personal experiences aren’t cut and paste.Calling me names is not intelligent debate.I left high school decades ago, Dr. Web site?? Ha you guys are chumps.call me when you grow up

  • Fair call Dic. However, the claims for MMS are, frankly, extraordinary regardless of anyone’s understanding of the molecules in use.

    Given that the base chemicals are abundant and freely available, it sort of beggars belief that, if MMS is so efficacious in treating such a broad range of often fatal illnesses, it is still only an underground, fringe, (dare I say it, alternative) treatment.

    On the same line of thinking, it would also seem odd that no reliable, peer reviewed research supports the claims made for the product. Now, before you launch into a diatribe on global conspiracy of Big Pharma and the All Seeing Eye, lets be clear – if this product did as is claimed, it would make huge inroads into the health issues present in 3rd world countries – countries that, not to put too fine a point on it, are highly contemptuous of intellectual property issues and are very open to effective medication.

    Since the underlying technology to produce this miracle cure is pretty rudimentary it would (if effective…) be ideally suited to 3rd world conditions.

    And yet, nothing.

    Your personal experience notwithstanding, there is no proof the treatment is more than homeopathy with a new twist. Arguing the chemical makeup of the product misses the point – regardless of the compounds there is no proof of efficacy and now plausible mechanism in any case.

  • Its kinda telling that in the entire miracleminerals website, there is absolutely no disclosure of the identity and location of the site’s owner – to the extent that their name and address have been expunged from the letter shown on the index page.

    I also note the Advertising Standards Authority found the website beached advertising standards in September 2012 and recommended the site (in its then form and content) be taken down http://www.asa.co.nz/display.php?ascb_number=12113

    So, figure it out. A site that was assessed by the independant advertising authority as being in breach of advertising standards selling an unproven untested unlicenced product at a gross margin of 1,000s of percent where the vendor is not disclosing any detail that would allow a person to follow up in the case of adverse (or no) reaction.

  • …however, after some digging, these sites share an administrator and technical contact – a Sid Wells with a postal address in Ngatea. Unfortch, Sid’s phone number is an Australian one…

    wakeupnz.co.nz – lunatic right-wing ramblings
    finalwarning.co.nz – lunatic religious ramblings
    ngateawatergardens.co.nz – I’ll leave this one to the readers

    Interestingly, Ngatea water gardens lists miraclemineral’s website in the “Amazing Discoveries” section of its “Useful links” and – quelle surprise – both sites have the same tab icon come up in the address bar of your browser.

    I wonder if they are, by chance, related?

  • To Michel Edmonds et al.

    Here is a link which discusses using MMS in Tanzania for the treatment of malaria

    http://www.globalresourcealliance.org/malaria-control-programs

    Of course, if you bother to read the entire page you will notice that they are use homeopathic neem oil (gasp) as well. Of course they must be fringe lunatics – musn’t they?

    To those close-minded logical positivists among you, is it not possible that a known pathogenic substance, if it can be safely ingested (by humans) in such a way that its efficacy is not destroyed and can reach its target pathogens, just MIGHT work.

    So what if it’s original use was to kill water-borne pathogens. Warfarin was first used as a pesticide (rat poison) before its blood anti-coagulant properties were discovered.

    You speak of quackery – what are your scientific grounds for making such a claim? Where is your evidence to the contrary, i.e. that ClO2 (via citric acid activated NaOCl ) cannot have a therapeutic outcome in humans, in the treatment of certain diseases of pathogenic or viral origin ?

    • Simon,

      When some one claims that a treatment “works” the onus is on them to prove it works, not for others to disprove it.
      However, I’m very confident that MMS does not work because there is no reasonable mechanism by which it could work The active bleaching agent produced when MMS is made will react with the early part of the digestive system way before it gets anywhere else in the body.
      You can complain all you like about “logical positivists” but it is extremely frustrating to have studied chemistry for decades and then have people make up treatments that are not grounded in science and show a blatant ignorance of science.
      And just because something works as a disinfectant externally does not mean it will do the same internally. For example, a bandaid might be useful for stopping bleeding externally but there is little value in swallowing a band aid for internal bleeding.

  • The linked document doesn’t actually say what’s in these Neem Drops; they simply refer you on. It is possible they’ve confused non-homeopathic mixtures (some people do), but they also mention 30C dilutions for other remedies, which truly are homeopathic dilutions.

    If These Neem Drops are at 13C or higher dilutions it won’t matter what the active ingredient is, there won’t be any of the active ingredient in the remedy given to the patients. (Dilutions byond that remove the last remnants of the active ingredient in the mixture.)

    For malaria news, I’d much prefer people look at the malaria vaccine news just out a few days ago.

  • Just to correct myself first, I wrote NaOCl when I meant NaClO2

    However, regarding whether something works or does not – some would say the proof of the pudding is in the eating…

    Time and again, practitioners in the field have confounded theorists by doing the so-called impossible. By the laws of physics, bumble-bees should not be able to fly. I seem to remember seeing one the other day (all to rare unfortunately, these days) and it seemed to be flying quite well

    I do think your band-aid example somewhat ingenuous though.

    I believe it is fair that if you demand proof of the proponents of a hypothesis, opponents of that same hypothesis should also produce proof of why their opposing claim stacks up better.

    You seem to be saying that any Cl02 generated would be unable to processed by the gastro-intestinal system into any viable, effective form. On what chemistry (or other evidence) do you base that? Or are you excluding such gastro-intestinal pathogens/parasites?

    Medicine (and Science) is full of examples of unexplained, even counter-intuitive situations where something works but no-one is quite sure why. It has taken many years to elucidate why stimulants help with ADHD etc. but even though it was counter-intuitive (according to the then-conventional knowledge), not knowing the mechanism didn’t stop the treatment from working.

    Sometimes you just can’t get away from the empirical facts.

    Science is continually confronted with observed data for which no causal explanation has yet been found – most of modern quantum physics finds itself in that situation – e.g. quantum entanglement, superluminal information transfer – the list goes on.

    I think mainstream science today (in the Kuhnian sense) needs to accept that not everything is explainable by mainstream science itself. It is the scientific vanguard which generates New Science and so challenges the mainstream and eventually brings the paradigm shift required for advancement.

    Human beings, like other living entities are multifaceted systems based not only on matter but also on energy – and such systems have emergent properties and behaviours not explainable through the “scientific reductionism” so beloved of the logical positivists

    As for the malaria question, leaving aside all issues of supply, affordability and the global medicines industry – vaccines don’t cure, they may prevent. What do you do for the people who already have malaria? – that’s what the article was about.

    Insofar as the Neem oil treatment goes, there is a link on the site to the usage protocol which covers issues like composition, dosage etc.

    • Time and again, practitioners in the field have confounded theorists by doing the so-called impossible.

      No, “practitioners” often claim they have evidence to prove their beliefs but typically when this is examined carefully and objectively their “evidence” does not hold up.

      By the laws of physics, bumble-bees should not be able to fly

      No, while this was a widely circulated belief, I dont think there is evidence that this was a claim made by the scientific community.

      Sometimes you just can’t get away from the empirical facts

      No, the empirical facts carry a lot of weight, but then the “alternative” medicine community has never provided reliable evidence to support many of their claims.

      Science is continually confronted with observed data for which no causal explanation has yet been found – most of modern quantum physics finds itself in that situation – e.g. quantum entanglement, superluminal information transfer – the list goes on.

      In some areas of science, particularly theoretical physics, there are hypotheses which are still being tested and some phenomena that has yet to be explained. However, that does not automatically mean that all of science is up for interpretation. Many areas have such substantive evidence supporting most of their theories that it would be perverse to challenge them without substantive evidence to show that these theories are wrong. And so far I have seen little such evidence to suggest that solutions of bleach, or water with statistically negligible quantities of random substances could have any beneficial effect on those taking them.

      I do think your band-aid example somewhat ingenuous though.

      Really? Then perhaps you missed the point.

      Bandaids perform a useful function externally, however, it would be wrong to assume that they therefore are effective internally

      Bleaches perform a useful function externally, however, it would be wrong to assume that they therefore have a beneficial effect internally.

      I hope that makes more sense.

      And by the way, your warfarin example is an example of good science. Warfarin in large doses kills pests by stopping their blood from clotting. In smaller doses this same property works as a blood thinner. In science the effects are related to the dose, so long as one does not consider a dilution until there is none of the original substance left as a legitimate and effective treatment.

      I think mainstream science today (in the Kuhnian sense) needs to accept that not everything is explainable by mainstream science itself. It

      And scientists do indeed accept this. What we object to is people coming along and filling in the gaps in scientific knowledge with fanciful and implausible claims with no reliable evidence to support them.

  • “Insofar as the Neem oil treatment goes, there is a link on the site to the usage protocol which covers issues like composition, dosage etc.”

    As I wrote earlier, “the linked document doesn’t actually say what’s in these Neem Drops”.

  • I have to agree with what Dic said. The author here confuses a bleach with sodium Chlorite. this is taken from Curzone.comhttp://curezone.com/forums/am.asp?i=1137977

    So we know exacty what is in this MMS.
    MS – Sodium Chlorite Content Simplified

    MMS, as manufactured to the specifications described in Jim Humble’s book, is not 28% sodium chlorite but rather 22.4%. This is explained in Part II Chapter 15.

    The sodium chlorite used in the manufacturing process is technical grade 80%. As stated in Thomas Lee Hesselink, MD’s overview, “On the Mechanisms of Oxidation of Chlorine Oxides”, the remaining 20% is a mixture of the usual excipients necessary in the manufacture and stabilization of sodium chlorite powder or flake.

    MMS is therefore not simply sodium chlorite and distilled water but more precisely:

    ~ 72% distilled water (H2O)
    ~ 22.4% sodium chlorite (NaClO2)
    < 5.32% sodium chloride (NaCl – table salt )
    < 0.28% sodium hydroxide (NaOH – lye)
    < 0.28% sodium chlorate (NaClO3)

    It is important that the actual sodium chlorite content of MMS NOT be overstated and the actual ingredients of MMS not be understated. The trace quantities of the remaining sodium chemicals listed above are considered nontoxic.

    Further, 22.4% sodium chlorite in 4oz aqueous solution of distilled water is not a “hazmet” (hazardous materials) chemical. This is important to understand when assumedly educated individuals refer to MMS as “hazmet” while either naively or disingenuously referring to regulations surrounding the transfer of bulk, concentrated/non-diluted sodium chlorite powder.

    If we are talking about 3rd world countries. I think they are much like the people here in there disbelief. so in the end even in third world countries it is the educated people who are in control of what is used to cure what in their country. Most times, And tell me who would do the peer review study? and who would pay for it? The pharmaceutical companies will do anything to stop competition. They would lose billions of dollars a year if this actually worked and I doubt they will ever study something that wont make them money. Even if they did do a study they have control of all the results and they are the only ones that would ever know. Fact is this stuff is used in water treatment plants. yea you could take to much.. I just suggest you don't.
    I really don't know how healthy you guys are or if you ever watched your child struggle with autism. I see a lot of people that would rather die then try something other then what their doctor tells them. Well I hope it doesn't happen to you because you will probably die if its something incurable. I watched my mom die like that. I should be dead from hep-c that Iv'e had for 35 years. I suggest you to to Kerri Rivera's website on autism and see what she has to say .http://mmsautism.org/. All I can say is that they have been finding parasites in most if not all the autistic children they have worked with. How could trying to kill parasites be something bad. How many years would it take to get peer reviewed studies done? how many lives would be lost waiting? and finally how can this harm anyone if done correctly.. The worst outcome is that you lose a little money. Oh and by the way you can make tons of the sodium chlorite yourself for next to nothing. Google it.

    • Matt,
      Your post provides no reasonable evidence to suggest that MMS works, and unfortunately invoked conspiracy theories about pharmaceutical companies

      All I can say is that they have been finding parasites in most if not all the autistic children they have worked with. How could trying to kill parasites be something bad.

      Ok, lets consider your statement logically.

      Who is they, and where is their research published?
      Would you find parasites in children without autism? I suspect yes. This would call in question your implication that parasites cause autism.
      Is MMS the best approach to killing parasites? Not really, there are other more effective treatments.

      Another thing I would point out, that is often overlooked by those who do not understand how drugs etc work when taken orally is that many substances when they are consumed behave differently inside the body that when used outside. sodium chlorite might act as a disinfectant externally but this does not mean it will have the same properties internally. It is likely to be broken down in the digestive system and it is unlikely to make it into the blood stream. Therefore many of the uses described by advocates of MMS make no sense.

  • (Rather briefly, as I’m short on time.)

    Leaving aside the chemical aspects –

    “billions of dollars a year”

    Those promoting their ‘natural’ remedies often point at ‘billions of dollars’ in the pharmaceutical, but at the same time leave out that the ‘natural’ remedy industry makes billions per year in the USA alone, never mind world-wide.

    “they have been finding parasites in most if not all the autistic children they have worked with”

    I’ve heard of any number of silly things said in the name of autism through the years. Always best to first have a quick peek in the real literature. (e.g. PubMed: I have, there’s pretty much nothing.)

    Several things worth remembering when facing claims about autism (among others):

    – autism has a very strong genetic component (it’s the mostly strongly genetic of the more common neurological conditions)

    – Autism almost certainly starts prenatally, i.e. early in development, while the child is still in the womb.

    – There’s an understandable, if misguided, tendency of these ‘remedies’ to divert attention away from genetics, as if to avoid pointing at the parents as part of the reason their child has autism. This is wrong on too many levels to go into here (it’d want a blog post in it’s own right), but suffice to say something being genetic isn’t ‘blaming’ anyone.

    With these and others in mind you can often pick out odd-ball claims without diving into details of the science. To follow your example, lets assume for a moment that these parasites are real: when and how are these parasites infect children and what are they? If these people are pointing at infections in 2-4 year old children, those children have already had autism for 2-4 years.

    While I can understand parents wanting a ‘cure’ for their child, there are many things for which there really is no such thing as a cure.

  • “All I can say is that they have been finding parasites in most if not all the autistic children they have worked with.”
    From what I’ve read on Ms Rivera’s site, these ‘parasites’ are ‘found’ as a result of giving autistic children MMS, either orally or via enema. (Personally I find this to be verging on child abuse.) Given that MMS is essentially bleach (despite the protestations above), then what the parents are probably seeing is sheets of rectal epithelium. Antihelminthic drugs would be a safer & surer bet, for those convinced that parasites are involved. However, as Grant points out above, there’s no evidence that they are.

  • I’m just having a look.
    It’s interesting reading.
    Grant Jacobs, on Pubmed I have found this:
    Dietary restrictions, including removal of milk and other casein dairy products, wheat and other gluten sources, sugar, chocolate, preservatives, and food coloring are beneficial and prerequisite to benefit from other interventions. Individualized IgG or IgE testing can identify other troublesome foods but not non-immune mediated food sensitivities. Gastrointestinal improvement rests on controlling Candida and other parasites, and using probiotic bacteria and nutrients to correct dysbiosis and decrease gut permeability. Detoxification of mercury and other heavy metals by DMSA/DMPS chelation can have marked benefit. Documented sulfoxidation-sulfation inadequacies call for sulfur-sulfhydryl repletion and other liver p450 support
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12495373
    It’s enough to start with.
    What is wrong with some hope?
    I am not so sceptical to think that all of this is just a scam.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5W_ky0RH8A#t=163
    Before one make up his mind and start condemning would it not be responsible to do some serious research, with open mind?
    Otherwise we might lose some good opportunities.

  • My grandson has autism and has been on MMS for over 9 months. We have all noticed a HUGE improvement in his mood and health. He is much happier in school and not quick tempered as he once was. His life (and ours) has improved dramatically thanks to taking this MMS. I take it as a preventative to any viruses going around and have not fallen ill since taking it. I am very thankful to Jim Humble for sharing this info. It is a lifesaver in more ways than one!

    • Dianne

      Great to hear your grandson’s health has improved recently.
      I’d like to know how you know that MMS is the reason for the improvement. Are there any other things you are doing to improve his health other than MMS?
      ANd how do you think a disinfectant could possibly help treat a condition that is at least partly due to genetics? There a re no micro-organisms associated with autism.

  • …and to be predantic, you don’t “have” autism – its not a disease or illness, its a congenital condition like your skin colour. You “are” autistic.

    Which in large part explains why MMS is highly unlikely to be an effective treatment. As Michael points out, I really don’t think bleach is altering your grandson’s genetic make-up.

  • Hi Dianne,

    ASD (and related disorders) are characterised by developmental delay – kids with them can, and do, progress later.

    MMS is exceptionally unlikely to have had any role in this.

    Improvements may be through training, e.g. at home or by a good teacher who has spotted their difficulty.

    There are many medical sites that can elaborate on this for you or point to further information on this. As just one example, this is from the University of Michigan health site: http://www.med.umich.edu/yourchild/topics/autism.htm

    If you’re open to a fairly ‘firm’ approach to the topic, one writer you might like to try is Emily Willingham, who frequently writes on autism (she as an ASD son). Currently see writes at Forbes magazine’s website (you’ll probably have to click past a ‘Thought of the day’ page): http://www.forbes.com/sites/emilywillingham/

  • Perusing the negativity to MMS treatment , noting there is not one comment with clear scientific evidence that MMS does not support as promoted when abiding by the correct dosage and instructions, plenty of rhetoric but no clear supported evidence.
    Who propels the conspiracy theory in this instance certainly not the promotors or users of MMS.
    It is also noticible the critics have provided no evidence from users that have directly take MMS, so I guess it is fair to say testimonials from users of MMS that supports MMS for their cause, would be classed as fake.
    If MMS is so dangerous for human usage in the prescribed dosage why has no one been charged with a major offence such as aiding murder for example.
    This of course would be ludicous given the usage warnings on approved prescibed medicines.
    What is the comparison recovery/death rate of MMS compared to prescribed medicine, dont seem to see it here.
    Maybe it would be more helpful to publish practical evidence on MMS prescribed dosage, ahead of theory.
    Just an interested observer

    • Alan

      “Perusing the negativity to MMS treatment , noting there is not one comment with clear scientific evidence that MMS does not support as promoted when abiding by the correct dosage and instructions, plenty of rhetoric but no clear supported evidence.”

      When someone makes a health claim it is up to them to prove it with evidence, not up to others to provide evidence it doesn’t work – proving a negative is not possible.

      MMS taken at recommended doses in a healthy person should probably do little harm, however, the point is that it will not help. Furthermore, those who a genuinely ill could be more vulnerable to it.

  • All you people that claim MMS dosnt work ,I would ask have you ever tried it for any health problems, or are you just spouting what you have heard.
    Ordinary drugs cause more problems but you don’t comment on that,people have actually died because of drugs , not one person has died from MMS.
    The “problem” with MMS is that it is too successful, big pharma dosnt like anyone taking potential profits from their often untested drugs, and that is not a conspiracy theory, why don’t you check whats in all the drugs on the market,you might get a shock.
    I have used MMS on animals and it has been successful after vet products failed, I have used it on wounds the result is always successful, I have used it on skin problems with the same success.
    I have ingested it for stomach problems it works .
    Don’t knock MMS until you have tried it.
    It is noticed the same people are critical of MMS no matter how many people have used and approved it, you will not be convinced because you are determined not to,one wonders if you people are in the medical or drug industries.
    MMS is not bleach, MMS would not be growing in world wide use if it was not successful, put aside your biased beliefs for a while and realise the benefits without drugs. As for autism if a mother says her child has improved she is the one one to know , I would trust her judgement because she is the one who deals with the distress of the condition, its easy to say the recovery is spontaneneous and nothing to do with MMS.
    If a new drug was found and administered and a cure happened ,you people would say it was a miracle drug ,but anything other than pharmacutecal products are a failure, it says a lot about the influence of FDA and drug companies to protect their profits.

  • Pull your heads out of your butts and try it instead of JUST knocking it ! Its FANTASTIC stuff ive used for years, kills the flu bug and viruses very quickly. Stick your toxic prescribed medicines ( expensive ) where they belong , in the rubbish bin. The guys in the white coats and you lot are the blind leading the blind. Wake up and stop following the sheeple ( sheep people ) Your minds are so narrow its a wonder you can manage to operate in a meaning positive way at all. Your narrow minded feeble follow the crowd statements are laughable. Get over your fears and try something yourself instead of following the pack into bad health and the retirement home for the non functioning .

    • Franky
      Thanks for the amusing post. What a variety of cliched insults you have elected to use in place of any reasoned argument.

  • “big pharma dosnt like anyone taking potential profits from their often untested drugs, and that is not a conspiracy theory, why don’t you check whats in all the drugs on the market,you might get a shock.”

    ‘often untested drugs’ – citation please. One of the reasons many pharmaceuticals are so expensive is because of the long lead time & very high costs involved in a proper testing regime.

  • I have used MMS for years and it has done wonders. I can get rid of a bad sore throat in two minutes. My friend Bill had a lady taking the MMS. Although when Bill had given the product, she was not eating. But after taking the MMS, she was completely healed! Just look up testimonies and you’ll see heaps.

  • If MMS is so amazing why don’t the Church use the profits from its sale to funderstand some legitimate research? There are plenty of PhD students looking for exciting new projects. Big pharma doesn’t need to be involved.

  • Just stumbled on this blog by accident, in my opinion what I am observing in many cases here is that there seems to be a egotistical reaction from Michael Edmonds and some others to the testimony of those who either believe through their own experience or other reasons that this stuff works.
    If it doesn’t work for someone surely they would not purchase any more, just a few dollars lost, if it works ?? I know what I would do if that were me.
    Now Micheal, are you setting yourself up as the defender of those poor people who have wasted so much money on one purchase, Are you afraid that someone might make a lot of this or is it academic pride on your part. Let the testimony of those who have used it do the speaking, good or bad. After all it appears to be harmless unlike many medications, I would suggest your time may be better spent reiterating the many things written on the warning labels, those possible side effects are scientifically validated aren’t they? Many drugs did not have known side effects at time of release to the public, this is likely still the case, now perhaps you could devote your great scientific knowledge in this area, it may actually help someone.

    • Your criticism would carry weight if it provided some evidence that MMS worked rather than making a personal attack on me. My concern is less about the money people waste on this product than the potential harm it can do, and the real possibility they might ignore treatments that would work and instead put their trust in this product.
      Commenters have also pointed out the information which accompanies this product explaining how it supposedly “works” have no grounding in science, so if you would like to try and explain how it works feel free.

Site Meter