With a knife I made an incision in my lower arm; there was no flow of blood as it thickened instantaneously; closing up of the wound, no inflammation, no pain, no mucus and pus: healed up in three days, blood-crust thrown off. Later, with vegetaric, food including mucus -formants (starch food), but without eggs and milk: the wound bled a little, caused some pain and pussed slightly, a light inflammation, complete healing only after some time. After that the same wounding, with meat-food and some alcohol: longer bleeding, the blood of a light color, red and thin, inflammation, pain, pussing for several days, and healing only after a two days' fasting.

I have offered myself, of course in vain, to the Prussian Ministry of War for a repetition of this experiment. Why is it that the wounds of the Japanese healed much quicker and better in the Russo-Japanese war as those of the "Meat and Brandy Russians?" Has nobody for 2,000 years ever thought it over why the opening of the artery and even the poison cup could not kill Seneca, after he had despised meat and fasted in the prison? It is said that even before that Seneca fed on nothing but fruit and water.

All disease is finally nothing else but a clogging up of the smallest blood vessels, the capillaries, by mucus. Nobody will want to clean the water-conduit of a city, a pipe-system, which is fed with soiled water by a pump, the filters of which are clogged up, without having the water-supply shut off during the cleaning process. If the conduit supplies the entire city or a portion of it with unclean water, or if even the smallest branch-pipes are clogged up, there is no man in the world who would repair or improve that respective spot; everybody thinks at once of the central, of the tank and the filters, and these together with the pumping machine can be cleaned only as long as the water supply is shut off.

"I am the Lord, thy physician"--English and modern: nature alone heals, cleans, "unmucuses" best and infallibly sure, but only if the supply or at least the mucus supply is stopped. Each "physiological machine," man like beast, cleanses itself immediately, dissolves the mucus in the clogged-up vessels, without stopping short, as soon as the supply, of compact food at least, is interrupted. Even in the case of the supposedly healthiest man this mucus, as already mentioned then appears in the urine where it can be seen after cooling off in the proper glass tubes! Whoever denies, ignores or fights this uniform fact, because, perhaps, it goes against him or is not scientific enough for him, is jointly guilty of the impossibility of the detection of the principal cause of all diseases, and this, in the first place, to his own detriment.

Therewith I also uncover the last secret of consumption. Or does anybody believe that this enormous quantity of mucus thrown off by a patient stricken with tuberculosis for years and years, emanates only from the lung itself? Just because this patient is then almost forcibly fed on "mucus" (pap, milk, fat meats) the mucus can never cease, until the lung itself decays and the "bacilli" make their appearance, when death becomes inevitable. The mystery of the bacilli is solved simply thus: The gradual clogging up by mucus of the blood vessels leads to decomposition, to fermentation of these mucus products and "boiled-dead" food - residues. These decay partially on the living body (pussy abscesses, cancer, tuberculosis, syphilis, lupus, etc.). Now, everybody knows that meat, cheese and all organic matter will again "germinate, put forth bacilli" during the process of decomposition. It is for this reason that these germs appear and are detectable only in the more advanced stage of the disease, when, however, they are not the cause but the product of the disease, and disease-furthering only in so far as the decomposition, for instance of the lung, is being hastened by them, because the excretions of the bacilli, their toxines. act poisoning. If it be correct that bacilli invade, "infect" from the exterior, then it is nothing but the mucus which makes possible their activity, and furnishes the proper soil, the "disposition."

As already said, I have repeatedly (once for two years) lived mucusless, i.e., on fruit exclusively. I was no longer in need of a handkerchief which product of civilization I hardly need even up to this day. Has anyone ever seen a healthy animal, living in freedom, to expectorate or to blow its nose? A chronic inflammation of the kidneys, considered deadly, which I was stricken with, was not only healed, but I am enjoying a degree of health and efficiency which by far surpasses even that of my healthiest youth. I want to see the man who, being sick to death at 31, can run without a stop for two hours and a quarter, or make an endurance march of 56 hours' duration--eight years later.

With this "mucus theory," well confirmed by my numerous experiments, there is for the first time put up a thorough, aetiologic, i.e., a cause--defining uniform conception of all diseases. If naturopathy here and there mentions certain affections of the blood as being the fundamental cause of all disease, this theory has proved insufficient because the food had been prescribed to be meatless or its contents of meat greatly reduced, at the same time, however, introducing so much the more mucus by means of bread, pap, milk, butter, eggs, cheese and farinaceous stuffs, especially starch food. That is the reason why most of the vegetarians in spite of their lauded bill of fare, are not healthy just the same. I myself was such a much--and mucus-eater for several years. If a considerable number of the vegetarians does not soon advance towards the only natural food, the fruit diet, or at least returns to eating little, there will be great danger of the shallowing-down of vegetarianism; not because the principle of "no meat eating" is bad, but because the healthful effects of the existing vegetaric nourishment are so inferior. The representatives of the vegetarian movement are still trying to prove what man is in need-of as regards boiled meals, because they themselves as well as all the amateurs in this field have a fundamentally wrong conception of the fruit diet as a healing remedy, and go at it in a wrong way. The hobby of the vegetaric propaganda is the argument that man is not a carnivore and that, therefore, the eating of meat is unnatural. With perfect right says the opponent that the eating of meat is just as "natural" as that of bread, cabbage, milk, cheese, etc. Professor V. Bunge has reproached the vegetarians for inconsequence more than a decade ago, and he is right.