You always see firemen at burning buildings, but that doesn't mean they caused the fire...

Have you ever heard the saying "You are what you eat"? Well I believe it. I believe that what we put into our bodies; food, thoughts etc affect us. I love to study the body and how it works. There are so many ideas, theories and hypotheses out there, so many truths. All pieces of the puzzle of how we work and still so many left undiscovered. One of the things I have studied that is very exciting to me is The Germ Vs Terrain Theory of disease. The terrain theory gets very deep on very small, microscopic, world and it really explains how & why we get sick. I want to share a story from an e-book I read years ago and am currently re studying to share the difference between the two schools of thought.

Let us proceed by setting the stage. Let’s go back in history a little over 100 years. We’ll go back to the days of the great debate between the “Terrainist School” and the “Microbiologists.” The setting is late nineteenth century France. The two great figures in our discourse are Louis Pasteur and Antoine Bernard (Bechamp). Both of these gentlemen were researchers and scientists. Louis Pasteur was a veterinary and chemist, while Antoine Bernard (Bechamp) was a medical doctor. They were both studying the cause of disease and each had a particular interest in the microbes that make up the vast flora of living systems.

Louis Pasteur believed that the microbe is the cause of all disease. He theorized that each disease had a particular microbe specific to itself. If one could identify the microbe and destroy it, one could cure the disease. This is the basis of the germ-theory.

O.k. Let’s pretend that you are a member of your city council, and you have hired me to recommend a course of action for the council to take in order to clean up the horrible trash problem. So, in I come, you have paid me millions of dollars, because of my degree and my years of experience, and this is my assessment –

“I have observed that your problem is not trash at all, it’s a rat problem. In observation of your fair city I find that where there is trash there are also rats. What’s more, where I have found many rats, I have observed more trash, and where I have found no rats at all, there has also been no trash at all. Therefore, rats cause trash. It is good that you came to me, because how else would you have understood that what you supposed was a trash problem, was actually a rat problem? For a fee, I will kill the rats in your city, and then all of your trash will simply go away.”

The Germ Theory of Louis Pasteur is precisely the same as the Rat Theory proposed by Dr. Bernard Jensen. Rats and germs have one thing in common – they are both highly opportunistic. In other words, they seek environments that meet their needs. Rats like garbage and germs do too.

Bernard (Bechamp) believed that disease is caused by dysregulation of the body terrain. That the state of the whole organism dictates whether an individual becomes ill, or manifests a set of symptoms, or whether they remained well and fight off the diseases around them. This is the Terrainist Theory of disease. The Rat Theory in reverse really applies here. Clean up the trash and the rats simply go away.

Bernard said in 1879 that, “It is the fixity of the milieu interieur which is the condition of free and independent life.” In other words, it is the homeostasis of the internal terrain that is most important to health.

Their philosophy, however, was not the only difference between these two great scientists. Each of them looked at microscopic environments using different equipment. Louis Pasteur looked at things under bright-field microscopy and he developed stains in order to identify clearly what he was looking at. The stains killed and denatured the blood, tissues and other materials observed. He was more interested in identifying and killing the offending organism, you see, than he was in understanding the body itself.

Antoine Bernard (Bechamp) did not depend so heavily on bright field microscopy for his understanding of microbes.. He also looked at living systems using dark-field technology. This allowed him to watch the living system and see what developed there. What he saw under Darkfield microscopy formed the basis of the Terrainist School of Thought.

In the plasma of the blood, between the red blood cells, against a black field, he observed tiny living organisms that he named “Microzhyma”. He postulated that the microzhyma were the living seeds of life and that these organisms in regulation help to maintain the body in a state of health and wellness. He further postulated that the lifestyle of the individual, the physical environment, the diet, etc., causes him to get sick and die or to remain well.

Rabies
A story has often been told that illustrates the debate that raged between these two researchers. It involves two brothers who lived in France, one in Paris and the other outside of Paris. One of the brothers was a prominent baker who provided baked goods for high-class restaurants in Paris. The other brother was a poor farmer. These two men had daughters of about the same age. One day both of their daughters were playing at the home of the farmer. Into the courtyard came a rabid dog and bit both little girls. One of them became sick and died. The other little girl did not become sick at all.

Of course the famous scientist Louis Pasteur was immediately called on to examine the body of the little girl that died. He had already gained renown for discovering the microbe that caused Hydrophobia (rabies). Having examined the body of the little girl that died from hydrophobia, he declared that she had indeed died of rabies. When he was asked why the other little girl didn’t even get sick his response is reported to have been, “perhaps the mouth of the dog was so cleansed by the first bite that when it came time to bite the second girl there were no more microbes left on its teeth and gums and that’s why she didn’t get sick”.

Those of you who have dogs or have ever worked with dogs know that the dog’s mouth, like any other mouth, is a filthy environment and that one bite is not ever going to “cleanse” all of the microbes off of the dog’s teeth or out of the dog’s mouth. But this explanation was fine and adequate for the uneducated family of the two little girls.

Bernard (Bechamp) came on the scene later. There was no body for him to examine, there was only a family to interview. He talked with the mother and father of the little girl that lived and with the mother and father of the girl that died. What he found was significant. The little girl that died was the daughter of the baker. She had quite a high lifestyle. She lived in town. She had fine clothing. She had plenty to eat. The little girl that lived, however, was the farmer’s daughter, and lived a much different lifestyle. This intrigued him.

Could the diet alone make the difference between life and death in the case of hydrophobia? What is it that is so terrifying about rabies? It is that every person who contracts the disease dies? Even today the prognosis after actual infection is very low.



This is what he observed about the little girl that died.

• She lived in town.
• Air was polluted outside because of the predominant use of coal.
• Air was polluted inside because of the use of whale oil lamps.
• Water was polluted because it came from the river that also doubled as the sewer system.
• Her diet consisted largely of processed carbohydrates (white flour), meat and rich sauces.

This is what he observed about the little girl that lived.

• She lived in the country.
• Air was clean and pure.
• Water came from the well. It was not polluted with sewage.
• Her diet was high in garden produce and low in processed carbohydrates. They were poor. They probably couldn’t afford much meat, rich sauces, etc.


Bernard observed the difference between these two lifestyles and these two diets and postulated that the little country girl’s internal terrain was regulated and the micro-flora that lived there naturally prevented the rabies from taking hold and making the little girl sick.

Whether or not this story actually ever happened is irrelevant. The fact that it has been told and re-told many times indicates how really diametrically opposed to each other’s way of thinking the two camps of microbiology were at that time.


In a nut shell there are the two schools of thought. Over the years I have worked hard to improve my health; changing my diet, healing emotional wounds & feeding my spirituality. I have put the Terrain Theory to the test and know it as truth. I also can appreciate medicine. There are times when our systems get out of whack and we need medicine to help get us back in balance. Combining the two schools of thought and gleaning from the truths of each and using them to our advantage are great tools to help us achieve wellness.

If anyone is interested in exploring this topic in more depth I found a great website that is easy to understand and gets in pretty deep http://www.laleva.org/eng/2004/05/louis_pasteur_vs_antoine_bchamp_and_the_germ_theory_of_disease_causation_1.html