Let's start with the first cell of an animal organism. Let's take the yolk at the origin of the chick embryo - the egg yolk is the female equivalent of the oocyte - and go back to its particularly close observation by Professor Antoine Béchamp (1816 - 1908).
I no longer see the egg in the same way now that I'm looking at it with a fresh eye, as Antoine Béchamp did in the nineteenth century.
His description is poetic, but the scientist observes and wonders:
|
‘The egg is certainly organised, skilfully organised. And what precautions are taken to ensure that nothing naturally disturbs the admirable order that reigns there. So many precautions are taken to isolate it from external accidents. The shell, the membrane that lines it and which by its folds forms the air chamber towards the end. The yolk or vitellus is suspended by chalazes in the white, which is itself made up of 2 concentric layers of unequal fluidity. In the yolk there is a reserved part, the cumulus proligere, the cicatriculus, the white spot where the embryo will develop. The yolk itself, during its stay in the Graaf's vesicle, as it is protected before arriving in the oviduct, where it is immediately enveloped by the albumin which is secreted by special glands. ... Embryologists have admirably described all these parts .... ...But having noted these marvellous arrangements, have they looked for what is endowed with transforming activity in the egg, what is really alive, what weaves the cells and tissues of the being that will come from it? And if they have looked for it, have they recognised it? (1) p.380-381 |
Indeed, if you are a scientist in particular, have you ever asked yourself this question? What's alive in vitellus?
Antoine Béchamp uses simple experiments to show how many lessons can be learnt that will help scientists who are a little lost by all the technological advances to get back to basics, in all simplicity.
Here are a few of the many experiments on eggs that Antoine Béchamp carried out, from which we can learn so much and reflect on.
Impenetrability of the yolk to foreign ‘microbes’ :
Observing mouldy eggs, he noted: ‘We have never found mycelium penetrating the yolk’ (1) p.183. Observation of the vitellus, cleaned and then opened, shows an intact yolk that nothing has penetrated despite the thinness of the vitelline membrane.
Here is another example described by Antoine Béchamp which confirms the impenetrability of living matter through this membrane, (2) p. 213 :
| ‘An egg yolk is an immense cell whose envelope is the vitelline membrane. This is an isolated egg yolk immersed in ordinary water, in unlimited contact with the air. Soon the surrounding liquid, which has become cloudy, swarms with vibrionians and ends up being fetid. The yolk swells, because the ambient liquid penetrates it by endosmosis; but the distended vitelline membrane, and consequently thinned, does not rupture. With everything in this state, the yolk is washed with a stream of pure water until all the vibrionians have been removed. If the membrane is then broken to examine the contents, it is easy to see that there is no trace of bacteria or vibrios and that the yolk's own microzymas have remained unaltered in their form and properties. However, here everything came together for the entry of external vibrionians; the thinness of the protective envelope and the current of endosmosis which had introduced external liquid into the cavity of the cell. This is my truly direct experience. |
These basic experiments seem to me to be a real lesson, showing how such a thin membrane, so ‘fragile’ in appearance only, can prevent any introduction of micro-organisms, and demonstrating the unsuspected protective capacity due to the extraordinary ‘organisation’ of living beings.
We inevitably wonder about the capacity of the membranes of living organisms to prevent the introduction of foreign micro-organisms. Why shouldn't our lungs be just as well protected by the pleura? The intestinal microbiota itself is normally contained in the intestine and does not invade the internal parts of the body in a healthy state.
But in this case, could the micro-organisms found in the supposedly ‘sterile’ parts, if they have not penetrated, be internal to the body? Why not consider this? I raised the issue of the absence of ‘sterility’ in living organisms in an article published by AIMSIB in 2019 (3). No scientist can now deny the presence of an internal microbiome, at the very least, in parts that have long been considered sterile, purely internal parts that do not include the digestive tract, whose flora was already known in the 19th century.
What about the egg? Is it just inert matter?
‘What is endowed with transformative activity in the egg, which is truly alive?"
For Antoine Béchamp, ‘no chemical reaction occurs without a provocative cause’. It was this need to find the cause of any transformation that enabled him to understand that all deep chemical reactions are inevitably carried out by small living ferments that he systematically sought out and found.
The yolk is full of small ferments:
Béchamp had already discovered very small ferments in the air that cause mould. He then discovered them in chalk, succeeded in making them multiply and called them ‘microzymas’ (= very small ferments).
Subsequently, Béchamp found these small ferments in all living organisms, which could easily be transformed into bacteria if he took them from the liver, for example. Functional analyses showed him that they had the specific characteristics of their origin (liver, pancreas, etc.), which they retained in their evolved form as bacteria.
| ‘Not only are microzymas personally ferments, but they are capable of becoming bacteria; and this aptitude, which is the same for all, does not manifest itself equally for all under the same conditions; which amounts to saying that, in each natural group of beings and for the same organism in each centre of activity, microzymas have something specific... And what is remarkable is that the bacterium derived from the microzyma is a ferment of the same order as it...’. (4) p.48 |
Well, Antoine Béchamp was able to observe them in the vitellus. They do not develop easily into bacteria, but they can multiply and ferment sugar and produce alcohol, just like any other ferment.
He followed the formation of the egg in the hen's ovary (1) p.492, observed their presence alternating with the development of yolk globules in which he assumed and confirmed that they multiplied:
|
‘But with the help of the experiments that I have set up, I have noted other particularities that prove that the globules in question, even when they are homogeneous, i.e. appear to be of a uniform texture, without internal granulations, these granulations nonetheless exist, but endowed with the same refractive power as the medium in which they are immersed, they are not visible. One way of studying vitelline globules is to use ‘Muller's liquid’ (a solution of potassium dichromate and sodium sulphate in water). This is how the homogeneous vitelline globules of the drawings -(1) pl V p.1010 - concerning the ovules still contained in the calyx, become much larger, sometimes doubling in volume, breaking up, and the granulations can be seen escaping like a cloud.’ (1) p. 497 |
Pigeon egg yolk globules after the action of Muller's liquid, revealing the numerous granulations.
How can we prove that these little ferments are indeed present in the yolk and do not come from the air? An experiment was proposed by a certain Mr Donné.
The aim is to disorganise an egg without breaking the shell. But try a hen's egg, the organisation is such that it is impossible to mix the white and the yolk without breaking the shell. Mr Donné came up with the idea of using an ostrich egg, the wall of which has to be broken with a hammer because it is so strong.
The shaken egg undergoes putrefaction using the microzymas originally contained in the yolk. At the end of the process, the microzymas are found still alive, but the sugar has disappeared.
|
‘... Let's ask ourselves what happens when everything is nipped in the bud by violent upheavals? It happens that what, in the divine plan, constituted a premeditated arrangement, something structured, built with a view to a specific goal, has been destroyed; so that the things in the edifice that were intended to remain separate have been confused; ...; as a result, the desired result is no longer achieved, even though the necessary matter is still present! So what has changed? The conditions: apparently little, but in reality the essential, without which matter will remain sterile! And yet, what was capable of producing a chicken just now, with its future, is it absolutely destroyed by the fact of having shaken the egg? It is undoubtedly the corpse of an egg, to use Mr Donné's expression; but in the chemical sense, is it a corpse? No, because it is active. " |
There are so many lessons to be learned from this experience:
1. The vitellus does contain small ferments that scientists have never considered as small living organisms, and it should be noted that these living elements are smaller than the cell and are inherited from ancestors, from the mother during the formation of the egg, but also from the father whose spermatozoa are formed by the accumulation of granulations (1) p.558.
2. Without the essential organisation needed to create a new little being, we can see that inert matter is still present, but it can no longer be used to develop an embryo. By focusing solely on inert matter, aren't scientists missing the point? Living matter and organisation. Antoine Béchamp's theory is called the ‘theory of organisation and life’.
3. Once the organisation has been lost, these little ferments live their lives on their own, feeding on sugar in particular, supplying alcohol among other things.
4. These little ferments are still alive at the end of putrefaction, and this is generally true in all his experiments. He showed through various experiments that ‘every organism is reducible to the microzyma’ - (1) p.658 - starting with the cell. He thus deduced that the ‘germs’ in the air are the remains of living organisms (animals and plants). He confirmed this assertion with the ‘little cat’ experiment - (1) p.624 - which could explain the microzymas preserved in large numbers in the chalk, still capable of fermenting and multiplying in a favourable environment. - (1) p. 189 - despite their age.
And for Antoine Béchamp, it became clear that the cell could not be the vital element.
The cell is only alive through the small vital ferments inherited from its parents. The microzyma is the vital element ‘per se’, he said, endowed with the transformative capacities of the egg, whose organisation is essential to enable the microzymas of the new individual to contribute in a coordinated way to its development.
Through other experiments and observations on the formation of the embryo, he noted that at certain moments in the beginning, the only elements present are the microzymas,
| ‘... When the ovule has not yet reached 2 cm in diameter, it is possible to discover states of this ovule where there are only molecular granulations; these are the extremes. When the microzymas decrease, the vitelline globules increase and vice versa: this is the middle state’ (1) p.494 |
Microzymas could therefore be at the origin of everything that appears during the development of the new little being... and why not genes, in particular, according to this relatively recent publication that shows the self-assembly of DNA from the granulations of the yolk (5). Genes, but also cells, tissues and all the structures of the individual.
Cellulogenesis :
Antoine Béchamp has not been able to reconstitute animal cells from microzymas, although his investigations have led to this conclusion. He explains:
|
‘In order to solve the problem of cellular and tissue synthesis, I looked to see if there were any natural products, considered to be alive and therefore organised, that could be considered to be made exclusively of microzymas. Such beings do exist. I have studied two in particular: one is known as ‘vinegar mother’, the other as ‘glairine’. (1) p.431 |
He succeeded in reconstituting vinegar mother cells by finding the right environment for this - (1) p. 433 - whereas in other environments, the same microzymas developed bacteria - (1) p. 436 - understanding that ‘it's all a question of the medium’ and the importance of preserving it.
He also attributed this role to the cell; in other words, the cell must maintain the equilibrium of the medium required for the function of a vital centre.
The little dots in these drawings are the microzymas that combine to form successive bacteria (from figure 1 to figure 4) OR cells (fig.5), but never both at the same time; it really is a question of the medium!
The cell theory in question :
Antoine Béchamp took a long time to become interested in these little bodies, which he discovered between 1854 and 1857. At the same time, he was discovering enzymes, the active substance that he understood caused the inversion of sugar in the first stage of fermentation, and realised that most often these tiny bodies, coming from the air (this time), then took the evolved form of moulds producing the same enzyme (called invertase in this case).
A long time later, confiding in Dr Edouard Fournié (2), he wondered if he had known that these granulations were already known as amorphous granulations, would he have been interested? Not sure, in his opinion.
It is undoubtedly difficult to question what has been ‘learned’, usually out of a desire to move forward, but if this knowledge is not verified, it can become a serious handicap for science and scientists.
Isn't it time to ask questions and take a step back?
Why should the cell be the smallest vital element when it is only transitory?
Why is the cell unable to produce its OWN metabolism, and owes it to a foreign bacterium in symbiosis?
Why should exosomes, particles which (like microzymas) have the characteristics of the cells from which they are extracted (6), be inert when we are constantly discovering a host of properties for them (7)?
Why should ‘mitovesicles’ (8) transport mitochondria outside the cell on the pretext that they have a metabolism? Couldn't these particles simply be living particles that are smaller than cells?
It's about time we learnt to distinguish between real parasites and internal elements, the living SELF, a vital element smaller than the cell that can take on a variety of forms depending on the medium and the functions it performs, because we are clearly not ‘sterile’, far from it, but more likely ‘impenetrable’ (to the living) in a healthy state.
‘We take them for parasites, of which we make genera and species’ said Antoine Béchamp, when we took “microzymas”, vital elements, for “microbes”, elements supposedly foreign to the organism.
It's time to look at living elements smaller than the cell in a different light, like Antoine Béchamp, who understood that without them, no chemical transformation could take place in a cell that lives only because of them. It seems to me that it would be difficult for science to continue to advance without looking back and questioning cell theory in particular.
Brigitte Fau - August 2024
In 2023, I wrote a book, ‘Antoine Béchamp, la compréhension du vivant’, published by Marco Pietteur, summarising the theory of organisation and life, reconstructing step by step the elements of this theory based on scientific facts (9).
(1) Antoine Béchamp – « Les Microzymas dans leur rapport avec l’hétérogénie, l’histogénie, la physiologie et la pathologie » (Paris, in-8°, 1883, chez J. Baillière) ; Lien sur le site de la BnF grâce auquel vous pouvez vous déplacer sur les pages citées.
The little cat experiment :
He buried a newborn kitten in chemically pure, precipitated, creosote-treated carbonate of lime: the whole thing was placed in a glass jar protected from dust, but where ventilation could still take place.
After seven years, the results were examined; the upper layers of carbonate of lime were intact, but where the body had been, things had changed. ‘All that remained of the little cat were a few scraps of bone; everything else, even the hair, had disappeared. The carbonate of lime, examined under the microscope, had the appearance of chalk, except for the small aragonite crystals that are usually seen in it. The microzymas were easily recognised by their shape and shiny appearance. It's a kind of artificial chalk’.
Thus, all that remained of the organism was the presence of the microzymas, just as the geological microzymas in sedimentary terrain are merely the remains of the organisms buried within them.
(2) Antoine Béchamp - « La théorie du microzyma et le système microbien » 1888 ; vous pouvez télécharger ce livre à partir de ce lien, partie « bibliographie » : https://www.bonnes-habitudes.fr/comprendre/la-théorie-d-antoine-béchamp/
(4) Hector Grasset - « L’œuvre de Béchamp » – éd. 2 – 1913. Ce livre est accessible sur le site internet de la BnF : « L'oeuvre de Béchamp (Pierre-Jacques-Antoine) (2e édition revue et augmentée) / par le Dr Hector Grasset »
(5) https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0968432813001017?via%3Dihub
(7) https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=exosomes
(8) https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35962195/
English version can be downloaded from this link
Écrire commentaire