Sea Minerals Cure
Newspapers, magazines and electronic media outlets all over the world recently announced a break-through vaccine that will hopefully protect women against breast cancer.
The following report — from CBS — is typical of what was said by numerous sources: “In the current study, genetically cancer-prone mice were vaccinated — half with a vaccine containing the antigen and half with a vaccine that did not contain the antigen. None of the mice vaccinated with the antigen developed breast cancer, while all the other mice did.”
Dr. Vincent Tuohy, Ph.D., the principal investigator on the project to create the vaccine, sums up the impact: “We believe this vaccine will some day be used to prevent breast cancer in adult women in the same way that vaccines prevent polio and measles in children. If it works in humans the way it works in mice, this will be monumental.”
We agree with Dr. Tuohy, who performed his research at the Cleveland Clinic in Cleveland, Ohio. If this vaccine works in humans, it will truly be monumental.
Let’s turn the clock back more than 60 years and look at remarkably similar research conducted by another man with ties to the Buckeye State. Dr. Maynard Murray completed medical school at the University of Cincinnati in the early 1930s and from 1938 through the 1950s conducted tests showing that vegetables, fruits and grains fertilized with sea minerals grew stronger and were more resistant to disease. Murray’s research also showed that mammals that consumed these vegetables, fruits and grains were healthier.
In his book Sea Energy Agriculture, Murray discusses experiments conducted by the Stritch School of Medicine at Loyola University in Chicago. Murray had an Illinois farmer, Ray Heine, grow oats, corn and soybeans on land that had been fertilized with 2,200 pounds of sea solids (sea salt) per acre. Researchers at Stritch fed the grain to numerous kinds of animals. Let’s look at one of those tests.
“C3H mice were obtained for this feeding experiment,” Murray wrote in his book. “This strain of mice has been bred so all the females develop breast cancer which causes their demise. The mice were two months of age when received and started on the feeding experiments. The life expectancy of this strain for females is no more than nine months, which includes the production of two or three litters. The experimental and control groups both consisted of 200 C3H mice and those fed on control food were all dead within eight months, seven days. The experimental mice that were fed food grown on the sea solids fertilized soil lived until they were sacrificed at 16 months; definitive examination revealed no cancerous tissue. The experimental group produced 10 litters compared to the usual two to three litters and none developed breast cancer.”
If the breast cancer vaccine story released last week was cause for celebration, wouldn’t Murray’s story also be cause for celebration? One would certainly think so. But dig into Murray’s work a little deeper and there is much more to consider.
Murray’s experiments did not stop with the mice. He had rats injected with cancer. Those rats that ate his grain survived. Those that ate conventional grain died. Rats were obtained that normally develop eye disease. Those rats that ate conventional grain developed the eye disease. Those that ate Murray’s grain did not. Rabbits on a high cholesterol diet of food produced conventionally all developed hardening of the arteries. Rabbits on the same high cholesterol diet of food produced on sea
mineral fertilized soil did not develop hardening of the arteries. A dairyman whose newborn calves could not get up to nurse solved his problem by feeding grain fortified with sea minerals. In some instances where the health problems were not completely eliminated in the first generation, the problem was normally eliminated in the second or third generation.
The list goes on for pages and includes not only diseases of mammals, but also diseases of crops.
If we conclude that the recent story about the breast cancer vaccine is “monumental,” as Dr. Tuohy says, then how do we describe Dr. Murray’s “vaccine” that can conceivably protect against many, if not all, forms of cancer, as well as heart disease and numerous other diseases, ailments and afflictions?
Why has Murray’s story for the most part gone unnoted? Is it possible Murray was less adept at public relations than scientific research? Is it more likely that medical companies — with a strong financial incentive in bringing their products to market — have developed a way to create public interest in new medical developments? Is it possible the media is not willing to consider that something as simple as sea minerals can conceivably be more effective than all the high-tech drugs and vaccines? Maynard Murray’s story is a very interesting one. He more or less stumbled onto sea minerals while talking to fishermen, who told him fish and animals living in the ocean never developed cancer or ulcers. He had to see this for himself and worked on a fishing trawler for eight months. This convinced him the fishermen were correct. Among many things he learned that creatures living in the ocean do not age the same as identical creatures living in fresh water. A salmon living in fresh water will die of cancer by the age of five and one-half years. The same fish in the ocean will not only be larger and stronger, but will not get cancer. Creatures in the ocean can live many years without noticeable aging. When the vital organs of a baby whale are compared to those of a whale of 80 years of age, there is no discernible difference.
Much of Murray’s work went to the grave with him when he died in 1983. Fortunately there was a man who knew Murray and his work and was unwilling to let all of those ideas die. The late Charles Walters, founder of this magazine, reprinted Murray’s original 1976 book and then did considerable research — including talking to those who worked with Murray — and wrote his own book entitled Fertility from the Ocean Deep.
These two books are creating a stir. They are not on the radar of the mainstream media, but I suspect that might not be too far off. Hundreds — and probably even thousands — of farmers are using sea minerals in one form or another. The most common use involves spraying sea salt on pasture and crops while applying something like compost tea, liquid fish and molasses or sugar. Those who have learned about the benefits of raw milk are certainly interested in combining sea minerals with the milk.
Mennonite farmers in central Kentucky have gone together to purchase sea salt by the tractor-trailer load from the Baja Peninsula of Mexico and are applying it to land where they are growing produce. One of the results is a great-tasting watermelon with a high sugar content. Amish farmers in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, are also buying sea salt from the same place and in the same quantities.
Agriculture is in the midst of a revolution. The family farmer currently has great difficulty competing in the production of pork and milk. Beef and produce may be another matter. Murray made the observation that our soils have been depleted of vital minerals due to being leached of these minerals by the forces of nature, primarily in the form of rain. I suspect when consumers realize their health may rest on the restoration of these minerals to the soils where their food is grown, the family farmer will have an edge because he will have a product the consumer wants and will be willing to pay for. The family farmer will rarely get rich, but it would certainly be nice to see him receive reasonable compensation for his labor and investment.
One passing thought. The people that bring us food are frequently demonized for what they have used to produce that food — whether it be genetically-modified grain, herbicides, insecticides, growth hormones, antibiotics and the list goes on. Could it be that the problem with our food supply is not so much what is in the food but what is not in the food? If our food supply were to contain the sea minerals that Maynard Murray and Charles Walters so strongly advocated, wouldn’t this do more for our nation’s health than all of the drugs and vaccines that are now on the market and will come onto the market in the future?
— Ralph Voss