|
Biological Transmutations
by Schjelderup, Vilhelm
In connection with hadronic
mechanics and the work to develop a new technology on the basis of
intermediate controlled nuclear fusion it is relevant to take up the
research of C. Louis Kervran on biological transmutations. Kervran was a
highly recognised French scientist who in the 1950-1970’s presented a
comprehensive scientific material indicating that in biological systems
of bacteria, plants, animals and humans transmutations of elements take
place. The work of Kervran has mainly been published in French, but in
1972 his book ‘Biological Transmutations’ was published in English.
From 1946 Kervran
was director for industrial hygiene and medicine in Paris. A problem he
encountered was sudden work-related death among welders. This was a well
known problem in several countries. Autopsies proved that the cause of
death was carbon monoxide poisoning. It was found high levels of carbon
monoxide in the blood. The problem, however, was that there was no
carbon monoxide present in the air at the working place. 3 subsequent
cases of death among welders in Paris made Kervran start very thorough
investigations. Having excluded all other possibilities he concluded
that the carbon monoxide was produced in the respiratory tract of the
welders, and that this was caused by transmutation of one molecule
nitrogen into one atom oxygen and one atom carbon, which together gave
one molecule carbon monoxide, according to the formula: 2N = O + C = CO.
The atomic nucleus of nitrogen has 7 protons, while that of oxygen has 8
and that of carbon has 6. The formula therefore adds up when one proton
is transferred from the one nitrogen atom to the other, thus producing
one oxygen atom and one carbon atom that combine into carbon monoxide.
For this process extra energy is required. A prerequisite is therefore
that the nitrogen in the air is heated passing the red-hot metal in
front of the welder before it is being inhaled. This was then the real
cause of the carbon monoxide poisoning and death of the welders. And it
turned out that this could easily be prevented by giving the welders a
mask with air intake from behind or having a cold stream of air from
below neutralise the heating over the glowing metal.
Another famous
example has to do with the content of calcium in egg shells and chicken
embryos. The parents of Kervran had hens having free access to a yard
where there were no lime stones. And yet the hens laid eggs with a good
content of lime in the shells. But there was plenty of mica, and he
noticed that the chicks were eager picking mica, which consists of
silica and not calcium. This was something which had first been observed
by William Prout in 1822. He did systematic studies of the diet of hens
and variations in the content of calcium in the egg shells and the
chicken embryos. Not only was the content of calcium in the egg shells
unrelated to the supply of calcium in the diet, but the skeleton of the
chicken when they were hatched contained 4 times as much calcium than
what originally had been in the egg. Apparently the hens, the chicken
and the eggs are able to form calcium, and Prout in 1822 claimed that
this was by transmutation. Kervrans studies confirmed this, and that
this was due to biological transmutation from silica to calcium. In one
of Kervran’s experiments hens had neither access to calcium nor silica,
and they laid eggs with soft shells. As soon as they got access to mica,
however, they started picking it very eagerly, as if they instinctively
knew this was a nutrient they needed. And at once they started laying
eggs with hard shells.
These are just two
examples of facts Kervran claims can not be explained otherwise than by
biological transmutations, that is by one element transmuting into
another element during biological processes. There are many examples of
this, and Kervran present them together in a comprehensive scientific
material. His way of representing this is solid and thorough. This is
fact based science at its best.
In chemical
reactions the elements remain intact. Kervran emphasises that it is not
a question of chemical reactions, and that the theory of biological
transmutations is not in conflict with chemistry, but represents a new
and different science. He tries to formulate basic principles for this
new science and explain which elements may transmute to which others. By
a transmutation of an element as a rule higher levels of energy are
involved than in chemical reactions. While the exchange of energy in
chemical reactions is measured in eVolt (electron-Volt), it is a
question KeVolt (Kilo, i.e. thousands of eVolt) in biological
transmutations. In nuclear physics transmutation of elements may happen
by fusion or fission at immensely higher levels of energy which we
measure in MeVolt (millions of eVolt).
We have here an
interesting parallel in the development of intermediate fusion in the
hadronic mechanics of Santilli. In his book Kervran is looking for
better scientific knowledge about atomic nuclei. He is aware that at
that time it was not possible to give the theory of biological
transmutations a more fundamental basis in theoretical physics. It is an
interesting question if such a more basic theoretical explanation now is
possible through the development of hadronic mechanics. If so the theory
of biological transmutations and hadronic mechanics will complement each
other.
Several of the
examples Kervran mentions have been known and described by others,
especially researchers who have studying agricultural problems and the
quality of the soil. Important elements of the research on biological
transmutations survive and prosper within the field of organic
agriculture. But in spite of the fact that many of his results were
confirmed by others and the support Kervran was given by many prominent
scientists, he did not succeed in having his theory accepted by
mainstream science. The most important reason for this was that it
seemed to be in conflict with basic tenets of chemistry as this has been
taught since the time of Lavoisier. Kervran writes about this:
“The preceding pages
have shown that transmutation of elements in biology is in no way
opposed to chemistry. Chemistry is a science which deals with
displacements of electrons in the peripheral atomic layers; it is the
science of molecules, not of atomic nuclei. The phenomenon I have
demonstrated involves an alteration in structural arrangements of atoms
induced by enzyme activities in living matter. It takes place within the
atomic nuclei; therefore it is a new science, quite distinct from
chemistry.” (C.L.Kervran: ‘Biological Transmutations’, Crosby Lockwood,
Bristol 1972, p. 112)
To establish a new
science, like Kervran tried to do, is a very demanding task. It is not
sufficient to present facts that demand a new explanation:
“In the preceding
pages I have presented some facts that no one has been able to refute or
contradict. I have mentioned some of the great men in science, people
who stand far above the anonymous crowd of specialists mass produced by
our educational system to meet our present technico-economic needs.
These prominent scientists have given me support and encouragement and
have helped me to publicise my work by discussion, by their own work,
and by their lectures and published articles. For these scientists only
facts are of value; and since the facts can be demonstrated and proved,
they can only be disputed by people who prefer to be unconvinced.” (p.
98)
A new science
demands the establishment of a new scientific field with its own
specialists receiving official acknowledgement and status in order that
they may rank equally with already established sciences. And at this
point Kervran and the science of biological transmutations failed:
“Excessive
specialisation leads too many scientists to see nothing outside their
own field. Today, too few keep their critical faculty intact or avoid a
blind adherance to dogma. It is clear that science today is a trade;
only a minority of those who live by science has the true scientific
mind in which facts alone matter.” (p.98)
This was written in
1970, but is at least equally valid today.
|
