women's converging menstrual cycles

Troels Wind wind at biobase.dk
Thu Feb 29 11:56:37 EST 1996


Dear Alexander Berezin and Alan Jackson,

Thank you Alexander for your followup on the issue of magnetic bacteria, in which 
you initiate a discussion of a somewhat different issue, namely netticette
(thats mis-spelled for sure).

I realise know that I've broken quite a few rules by flaming Alan so roughly for his 
posting where he presents magnetrition. Youre right Alexander, I was way out of 
line, therefor, if you read this Alan, I apologise for the following remarks:

> Mr. Jackson, youre sick!

and

> I hope you get better soon,

There is no need to miscredit youre state of mind. The rest of my my reply may 
be harsh as well, but at least not personal...

I hope you will accept my apologie and allow me to point you to a few holes in
your theory on megnetrition.

In the article from THE NEWS-TIMES (never heard of it...) that you include,
the whole concept of cell-division, origin of life and ageing are connected to
the existence of magnetic bacteria INSIDE every cell in the human body.
Regarding cell-division you say in your comment: 

     The movement and individual component functioning increases. The increasing
     friction causes the temperature to be always on the rise. When the
     temperature reaches a certain point, the thermo-active qualities are
     triggered in the magnetic bacteria.  Half the population of bacteria
     head north, the other half go south.  As this happens, the dna and other
     components of the cell are halved and pulled apart by the magnetic
     bacteria seeking its prospective magnetic pole, causing the cell to
     divide.

In the article its said that

      MR. JACKSON believes that as human cells age , magnetic bacteria and
    other bacteria crowd the cells, creating excess friction or heat (thermal
    energy), which effectively demagnetizes magnetic bacteria for a moment,
    causing half the bacteria to lose their orientation to flux lines and
    head in the opposite direction.  This intense action may cause cells to
    split.

If I understand this correctly, you suggest that cell-division is a result of
crowding of magnetic- and other bacteria, making the temperature rise
again making the bacteria split into two groups; one going south one going
north. IF this statement was valid, the cells would have to keep a north/south
orientation during mitosis/cell division, which is not the case. Just imagine
the cells of your body, how can one dividing cell obtain this orientation 
for more than a splitsecond when you move around?
Furthermore, the whole idea of having cells crowded with bacteria as a result 
of ageing seems at the best unbelievable. Keep in mind that cells and bacteria 
are large enough to be seen in the microscope, and the only 'bacteria' in 
eucariotic cells are the organelles, that once a long time ago probebly was 
bacteria, but now 'live' inside cells in a symbiotic manner like the mitochondria
in animals and fungi. 
Evenif the number of mitochondria increase with age (I dont really know), it 
could notinduce a temperature increase by 'swimming around' simply because 
they dont have any organelles for movement. If you read this Alan, exactly
how large an increase in temperature are you talking about? Cells in humans 
do have different temperatures, usually ranging from approx. 35 to 37 degrees
celcius, but these limits are often broken.

In the article it is also stated that:

    He (Alan) thinks indians used to carry their papooses
    (babies) on their backs to keep them moving and thus indirectly helping
    the body grow.

Well, thats a possibility...but maybe it just seemed like a good alternative to 
leaving them behind alone.

Another quote from the article:

    He (Alan) believes that scientists may have overlooked the fact that magnetic
    bacteria heading in opposite directions may cause DNA (dioxyribo nucleic
    acid) molecules in the cell nucleus to split.  DNA is associated with
    the transmission of genes in all living things. 


Alan, do you suggest that the genom interacts directly with the bacteria? That 
I would find hard to believe since no 'bacteria' can be seen inside the nucleus 
of cells.

Regarding the origin of life, Alan suggst that magnetism is a prerequisite:

    "If we go to other planets, and no molten lava is flowing under the
    surface to create a magnetic field, the chances of finding life as we 
    know it is slim."

Thats an argument with no impact since we havent been to other planets, except
the few nearest by.

When concidering iron as a nutrient, Alan believes it is more than a coincidence
that humans need iron supplement to exist (From the article). Since iron is 
crucial for the function of heamoglobin, that transports oxygen from our lungs
to the body, it is DEFINETELY not a coincidence.

Another quote from the article:

     THE NUMBERS of north-seeking and south-seeking magnetic bacteria at
    the equator have been proven equal, indicating the effect of flux lines
    on bacteria.

If this is true, it doesnt prove anything until compared with the distribution of
'north-seeking' and 'south-seeking' bacteria as one moves from equator and north
or south.

Well, I guess that was most of it, I'm getting tired for sure, but I think I've made
my point: I dont believe in magnetic bacteria inside cells, and the material 
supplied by Alan only makes me concider it to be even more unbelievable since
the 'proofs'are missng. Oh, I almost forgot, references! Thats pretty simple:

Molecular Biology of The Cell by Alberts et al.
Garland Publishing, Inc. New York & London.

That should do the job...

Finally a few comments for you Alexander. You wonder why I went so harsh
on Alan, I had the following reason: First, Alans method of promoting his
thoughts made my stomach turn. Its fine to go public with your ideas etc. as
long as you present them as what they are: Ideas! When I read the posting by
Alan, I felt that he was giving his ideas an atmosphere of science by quoting
scientists, but he never really made any connection between the quote and his
ideas. For example:

      Dr. Blakemore and Dr. Richard B. Frankel of the Massachusetts Institute
    of Technology wrote that "magnetotactic bacteria are bottom-dwelling
    organisms that are either anaerobic (capable of living only in the absence
    of oxygen) or microaerophilic (surviving best in environments with little
    oxygen)."

      Therefore, they theorize, these bacteria would have a tendency to
    migrate downward, depending on their location, because "it would help
    them to avoid toxic effects of the greater concentration of oxygen in
    surface water."

So what? There is NO link to Alans own ideas.

And:

      DR. RICHARD P. BLAKEMORE, a scientist at the University of New   
    Hampshire, has said that amorphous cells (cells without form) accumulate 
    a great deal of iron from outside cell walls to produce magnetic 
    particles.

Again, a scientist is quoted but there is no direct support in the quote for Alans
theory.

You, Alexander, write:

>It may well be that in a case of menstrual converging
>there is no a single ('one size fits all') mechanism,
>but several competing routes can be opertaional. 
>Making assumption, testing them, rejecting, etc. is
>what we call science. Saying (as you do) ... "stick
>to the pheromon theory ..." is a pseudo-science (or
>at best metaphysics), because it presumes that you know 
>the 'true answer', which often turn out to be wrong.

All I say is, that when the topic of 'cycle-converge' is to be explained in a
biology course, it wouldnt be appropriate to base your teaching on a one-
man-theory like Alans. After all, Jennifer had to TEACH the subject , not
RESEARCH it. I have not clamed that pheromones is the one and only
answer, just suggested thatit must be a well-studied signal pathway worth
looking in to. And please, there is really no need to lecture me on what
science is... And exactly what were  you thinking when you postulated that
my saying "stick to the pheromon theory ..." is pseudo-science?! As outlined
above, this statement was merely a suggestion to Jennifer regarding where
she could start her search for material on the subject,. I cant see
how you could interpret (? spelling) it as being my ANSWER to
'cycle convergens'.

(This is the longest posting I've ever made, I hope sombody reads it :)

Best regards to you all,

Troels Wind
PhD-student
Institute of Molecular and Structural Biology
University of Aarhus
Denmark




More information about the Bioforum mailing list