Antibiotics

The core premise underlying everything Aajonus said about antibiotics is that the body contains 150 bacterial genes for every one human gene in some passages, and in others he states 360 bacterial genes to every one human gene, with the overall proportion of the body described as 99% or 99.5% bacterial. He used this figure not as an abstraction but as a direct calculation of the harm each antibiotic course causes.

The ratio he returned to most consistently across workshops is 150 bacterial genes to one human gene, which he also described as meaning we are "not even a half a percent human." With that biological reality established, the arithmetic of antibiotic damage becomes concrete: one five-day oral antibiotic course destroys 1% of all bacteria in the body, meaning 1% of all bodily function, including digestive, muscular, and neurological function. He was explicit that this destruction is not limited to the intestines but occurs throughout the entire system.

A ten-day course destroys 2%. If someone takes antibiotics for ten weeks, that is 10% of the entire body destroyed. Six months of antibiotics, which he described in the context of a doctor who gave his mother antibiotics for that duration after a surgical hearing implant, destroys somewhere between 30% and 40% of the body's bacterial population and therefore 30% to 40% of its functional capacity. He stated this plainly: each course reduces functionality, and the reductions accumulate. There is no full recovery unless the diet is exceptional, and even then recovery is slow.

Aajonus offered a specific explanation for why antibiotics appear to work roughly half the time, and he framed this explanation as a challenge to the industry to observe blood uniformly following antibiotic administration.

When a person takes antibiotics, two things happen simultaneously. First, the body detects the antibiotic as an industrial toxin and shifts its bacterial priorities away from detoxifying damaged or dead cells and toward containing and removing the antibiotic itself. This means the detoxification of previously stored industrial chemicals is suppressed. The janitorial bacteria that were dissolving industrially damaged cells stop that work and redirect toward the new toxin. Second, hormonal and hormone-related substances become elevated as a stress response, producing a temporary increase in perceived energy and a reduction in symptoms.

The result is that the person feels better temporarily. Symptoms are alleviated not because the underlying condition was resolved but because the bacterial cleanup of damaged cells has stopped, reducing the inflammatory and eliminative symptoms that cleanup produces, and because stress hormones mask fatigue and discomfort. Meanwhile, the stored industrial toxins that were being cleared remain in place, the damaged cells that were being dissolved accumulate further, and the new toxin from the antibiotic must also be processed. The body becomes progressively more burdened, not less.

He stated this directly: "You stop it and added more toxins to it and complicated the body. And maybe it'll take you six months to recover. Years if it's penicillin to recover."

Aajonus reserved his most detailed and sustained critique for penicillin, which he described as the most dangerous of all antibiotics for a specific biological reason related to the nature of molds.

Penicillin is, in his account, a grain mold. In nature, he said, it is part of the avian biological system, a mold that helps birds digest grain matter when conditions are dry or food is scarce. It belongs to the bird community. When introduced into the human body it does not belong there, but more critically, the sterilization process that pharmaceutical manufacturers apply before injection or ingestion destroys the RNA that governs the mold's hibernation cycle.

All molds in nature operate in cycles. They become active for three to five months, do their work breaking down organic matter, then go dormant for three to five months, allowing the body to adjust. This on-off pattern is the natural intelligence of the organism. When penicillin is sterilized, that shutdown mechanism is destroyed. The result is a mold that is always active, that never goes dormant, and that grows continuously in the body as long as the person consumes carbohydrates or grain-based foods, because those are the substrates it feeds on.

He stated: "Penicillin lives in the body and has no shut-off switch because they sterilize it before they inject it in you. So penicillin will grow in your body as long as you're a carbohydrate eater or a grain eater."

The byproducts of this continuous fungal activity include toxic compounds he identified as aflatoxins and varitoxins, both of which he described as carcinogenic contaminants. The accumulated byproducts of unchecked penicillin growth cause, in his account, massive skin disorders, tissue dehydration, sclerosis, multiple sclerosis, and extensive brain damage. He observed penicillin growing most frequently in two locations in the body: the intestines and the brain.

He described a case in which he analyzed half a cup of discharge collected from a patient over a little more than one week and sent it to a laboratory with instructions to run three tests on thirds of the sample. All three portions came back containing penicillin fungus. This finding drove his further investigation into where and how penicillin establishes itself in the body.

He said penicillin stores preferentially in the joints, especially the hands and feet. When people develop fungal conditions where skin itches and peels, he attributed this most often to the body eliminating stored antibiotics or medications that had created mold conditions within the body. He observed two yellow spots in the brain in examinations he described, which he attributed to penicillin, and he stated that in the eyes, penicillin shows up as yellow discoloration, calling it "very toxic stuff."

He also noted that penicillin causes teeth to turn gray and yellow as people age, and that children given penicillin at very young ages face severe developmental consequences because the lymph system has not had sufficient time to develop the capacity to manage such chemical insults. He described one case involving a girl who was given penicillin on the day she was born because she was diagnosed with pneumonia. It took one day to receive the laboratory confirmation of the pneumonia diagnosis, and she was given penicillin on that day of birth. He tracked this case and connected her subsequent health problems directly to that early penicillin exposure.

Even when penicillin's activity is beneficial in clearing severely toxic or decayed tissue, he said, in people who are already extremely depleted, the continuous unregulated activity can be overwhelming because "most of their body is rotting and decaying." In those cases he recommended specific formulas to reduce penicillin activity while the person rebuilt nutritional reserves.

The time frame for reactivation of sterilized penicillin mold within the body was stated as 6 to 18 months. After that window, the mold becomes active and continues growing indefinitely.

Aajonus dismissed the cultural narrative around penicillin's discovery as pharmaceutical marketing. He described the claim that "penicillin's been the best thing since the wheel" as "quite a marketing job." He said that the narrative of penicillin saving lives obscures the mechanism by which it appears to save lives: it fills the body with such alarming toxicity that the body halts its detoxification of previously stored dangerous toxins in order to prioritize stopping the penicillin contamination. This suspension of prior detoxification produces a temporary adrenaline-like response that creates a false sense of improved health.

He acknowledged that penicillin saves lives in the narrow sense that it can stop an immediately dangerous detoxification process, but he argued this comes at the cost of loading the body with aflatoxins and a mold that will continue to cause damage for the remainder of the person's life. He stated: "Penicillin has caused the quality of life to immeasurably decrease along with saving lives."

One of the most consistent arguments Aajonus made about antibiotics concerns their prescription for viral conditions, which he called pointless and in some descriptions "the stupidest thing in the world." His reasoning was grounded in his understanding of what viruses are: not living organisms but protein bodies, protein constructions assembled by cells, that function as solvents or soaplike degreasers to dissolve waste products the body cannot otherwise eliminate.

He said: "Viruses are not alive. They're protein bodies that act like solvents. They dissolve tissue. They're not alive, do not give antibiotics for viruses."

Because viruses have no nucleus, no respiratory system, no digestive system, no elimination system, and no nervous system, they cannot by any biological definition be classified as living. They are, in his analogy, comparable to soap. Asking whether soap is alive is the equivalent question. Soap does not reproduce; cells make soap. Viral particles do not self-replicate in any living sense; cells manufacture them as tools for dissolving particular categories of waste.

This was, he said, standard understood chemistry up to about thirty-five years before his workshops. The pharmaceutical industry, recognizing that antibiotics could only be sold for bacterial conditions and that viruses represented a large market they were excluded from, began promoting the idea that viruses were alive so that antibiotics could be prescribed for viral conditions, doubling antibiotic sales. The older generation of doctors openly objected, he said, and there was conflict for about twenty years. Eventually, financial incentives including industry-funded medical education and "kickbacks" from pharmaceutical companies brought the older physicians into compliance or retirement.

He described doctors who prescribe antibiotics for viral conditions as "not even ignorant, stupid," because the information was available in their medical training and they either failed to learn it or chose to ignore it.

A central consequence of antibiotic use that Aajonus described in detail is the destruction of intestinal bacteria and consequently of digestive capacity. He stated that 90% of digestion is bacterial, and that when antibiotics destroy intestinal bacteria, the person's ability to break down food, absorb nutrients, synthesize proteins, and produce B vitamins is severely compromised.

He described this as a cascading problem: the person takes antibiotics, their intestinal bacteria are destroyed, their digestion is impaired, the nutrients they consume are no longer properly absorbed, their body cannot receive the raw materials it needs to rebuild damaged tissue, and healing slows or stops. At the same time, the body must now also process the antibiotic itself as a new industrial toxin.

He explained that bacteria in the intestinal walls are responsible for mucus production, and that antibiotics damage those bacteria as well as the primary digestive bacteria, "drastically reducing mucous formation and digestive abilities." He identified extensive antibiotic use as "the main cause of rapid development of leaky gut in fetuses and children, as well as adults."

The symptoms of antibiotic-induced intestinal disruption he listed include constipation, diarrhea, and various other digestive complaints. He said: "You're going to get weaker and weaker for months until your intestinal tract repopulates."

He gave a specific example of his mother receiving antibiotics for six months following a surgically implanted hearing aid. The result was that she stopped digesting food and stopped eating entirely. The intestinal tract is 90% bacteria, and destroying that population meant digestion effectively ceased.

He also discussed the case of premature infants given powerful antibiotics and immunoglobulin, describing this as depriving them of nutrients while simultaneously poisoning them. The symptoms he listed for premature infants suffering antibiotic-induced iatrogenic complications include respiratory challenges, feeding troubles, damage to intestinal mucous membrane walls, and destruction of digestive bacteria. He said common sense should tell any doctor that since the intestinal tract contains 360 bacterial genes to every one human gene, antibiotics will gradually or quickly destroy the bacteria responsible for digestion.

Aajonus connected antibiotic use directly to depression, including clinical depression, through the same bacterial logic. His argument was that because all bodily functions including neurological and emotional functions depend on bacterial activity, reducing the body's bacterial population reduces the biological substrate of emotional life.

He stated: "You destroy the bacteria, you destroy the virus, you're going to have depression." He said he did not personally know anyone who took antibiotics on a regular basis who was a happy person. Everyone he had known during and for long periods after heavy antibiotic use became depressed. He gave the example of a patient whose father had a heart valve replacement surgery and was subsequently prescribed antibiotics to prevent rejection. The father developed depression. Aajonus connected this directly to the bacterial destruction caused by the antibiotics.

He said the bacteria that are destroyed by antibiotics are "part of their life, part of giving them life," and that depression following antibiotic use is not a coincidence or an unrelated condition but a direct consequence of reduced bacterial function in the nervous system and throughout the body.

Aajonus traced the widespread prevalence of fungal infections, including candida and athlete's foot, directly to antibiotic use. He noted that crotch rot and foot decay did not appear in medical records before penicillin and antibiotics were introduced. He said: "Not even in Greece and Rome. Nobody had crotch rot or foot decay. Didn't exist."

He observed this pattern across his travels in Asia, where he said he rarely saw fungal infections except among populations receiving antibiotics. The mechanism he described is that antibiotics themselves are molds, and while the molds are sterilized before administration, they reactivate within the body after 6 to 18 months and then grow continuously, creating conditions for widespread fungal overgrowth.

He also described how women who take antibiotics while pregnant or nursing put their offspring at very high risk of anemia, leukemia, malformation of cartilage, weak joints, and other bone problems. He discussed this in the context of explaining that all antibiotics create unnatural antibodies inside the human system, and those antibodies must be eliminated. If they are not, they disrupt normal functions, consume large quantities of blood nutrients, and destroy tissue.

He identified penicillin as a common cause of joint storage, particularly in the hands and feet, and said that the itching and peeling skin commonly attributed to fungal infection is usually the body eliminating stored antibiotics or medications that have caused molds to form within the body.

Aajonus was explicit about the role of infection in wound healing and argued that antibiotics used in wound care actively prevent recovery and can cause limb loss. His argument was that when infection occurs in a wound, the white blood cells are delivering toxicity out of the wound, and this is the intended purpose of the inflammatory and infectious process. The bacteria present are consuming damaged and dead tissue, reducing the waste that the body would otherwise have to clear through its own resources.

He described his own experience with a leg wound, in which he was warned by doctors that if the infection was not stopped he could lose his leg. He said he continued allowing the bacterial process to proceed without antibiotics and healed properly. He argued that if the body is given antibiotics during wound infection, the digestion is destroyed, the nutrients delivered to the area are not properly metabolized, and the body's white blood cells must now address the fungal contamination from the antibiotic rather than the wound itself. The result, he said, could be that the person actually does lose the limb, not because of the infection, but because of the antibiotic.

He noted that antibiotics affect the heart, lungs, and central nervous system and said that in cases diagnosed as bacterial food poisoning, it is most often the drug treatment that causes deaths rather than the bacterial condition itself. He described multiple cases from his recorded observations in which people who experienced vomiting and bloody diarrhea on the Primal Diet did not suffer glandular or organ damage because they did not take medication, while those treated with antibiotics experienced escalating complications.

Aajonus described in detail his own hospitalization following the removal of his appendix, which he said did not resolve his intestinal cramps and pains. For the subsequent four days he was injected with chemicals, antibiotics, and penicillins every two to four hours. He was also given painkillers, muscle relaxants, and sedatives to keep him sedated and not complaining.

He described the progression: the fevers continued during antibiotic and penicillin injection; he became severely allergic to the penicillin with vomiting, explosive diarrhea, and swelling throughout his body; they switched to other antibiotics; and by the end of this period he was "black and blue and swollen all over and in excruciating pain" to the point where even painkillers and anesthesia were no longer effective. He recovered by refusing further medication and leaving the hospital 24 hours after he began refusing treatment.

He used this experience as a basis for advising his consultation clients and readers to refuse antibiotics in hospital settings and to prepare legal documentation in advance preventing medical personnel from administering medications including antibiotics without consent.

Aajonus discussed antibiotic use in food-animal production, citing consumer testing that found 52 different antibiotics in New York metropolitan area milk samples in 1992, following a regulatory change that permitted antibiotic levels up to one part per million. During that two-year period, he noted, cows were overdosed with antibiotics and new bacterial strains developed.

He provided a specific illustrative calculation: if a cow had one billion bacteria in her system and was treated with streptomycin that killed all but one, that one survivor would be immune and would reproduce a new population with total immunity; doubling its population every twenty minutes, it would take ten hours to grow to one billion. Multiplied across nine million cows receiving 52 different antibiotics, the scale of resistance generation is enormous.

He framed the public discussion around antibiotic resistance in livestock not as a genuine attempt to protect public health but as a commercial strategy: call the old antibiotics bad, create a new bacterial threat that is resistant to existing drugs, and introduce new antibiotics with immediate sales. The rhetoric about feeding animals fewer antibiotics, he said, was a smokescreen for that commercial bottom line.

He also described the use of antibiotics in beekeeping to kill mites, saying the antibiotics used for this purpose were killing the bees, creating the appearance of a bee contamination crisis that was actually antibiotic poisoning of hive populations.

Aajonus developed a specific framework for understanding how the body responds to antibiotic ingestion at a metabolic level. When antibiotics enter the body, they are recognized as industrial toxins. The body's bacterial systems shift their priorities: instead of continuing whatever detoxification was underway, whether clearing industrial chemicals stored in tissue, dissolving damaged cells, or processing accumulated metabolic waste, the bacteria redirect toward containing and eliminating the new antibiotic toxin.

This priority shift has two consequences. The first is that whatever detoxification was in progress stops. The industrial toxins or damaged cell material that the body was clearing returns to storage. The second is that the body becomes more burdened over time, not less, because the old stored toxins remain, additional toxins from the antibiotic are added, and the overall detoxification timeline lengthens.

He said: "What you've done is caused the body to stop detoxing the stuff that was moving you toward a bigger disease, a greater disease. You've stopped it and added more toxins to it and complicated the body."

He applied this specifically to situations where detoxification symptoms lead people to seek medical help. The detoxification symptoms, whether fever, discharge, swelling, or pain, are the body's active process of eliminating stored industrial chemicals. Taking antibiotics stops that elimination. The symptoms resolve not because healing occurred but because the process was interrupted. The person believes they were cured. The stored toxins remain.

He described his own five-month detoxification between April and September 2011 as resulting from prior injections and anesthesia, and he noted that during that period his brain's capacity for writing became unresponsive and agitated when he attempted to write, illustrating the neurological scope of antibiotic and pharmaceutical toxin accumulation.

Aajonus extended his critique of antibiotics to include the broader category of antibacterial consumer products, which he regarded as operating on the same destructive principle. He described antibacterial clothes, blankets for babies, and antibacterial cleaning products as chemicals that destroy bacteria, and said these products erode the bacterial populations that the body depends on.

He linked the proliferation of antibacterial products to the same pharmaceutical and medical industry framework that promotes antibiotic drugs, arguing that the entire category of antibacterial consumer goods is designed to generate fear of bacteria and dependency on chemical intervention.

Aajonus offered specific protocols for people who had already taken antibiotics and were trying to recover, as well as alternatives to antibiotic use for conditions conventionally treated with them.

**For people currently hospitalized or recently given antibiotics**, he recommended milkshakes and cheese, specifically two milkshakes per day, eight to ten eggs per day, one meat meal, and cheese every twenty minutes in quantities of one-quarter to one-half teaspoon. He described this as keeping a continuous train of cheese moving through the system to absorb the poisons. He specified this protocol for people who have had antibiotics that destroy the digestive tract first. He said: "A little bit of food at a time because you've had antibiotics which destroy the digestive tract first."

**For detoxifying bacterial activity that has become too intense**, he recommended lime juice as an alternative to antibiotics. He described taking three to four tablespoons of lime juice in about half a cup of liquid, sipped slowly so it permeates everywhere rather than irritating the kidneys and bladder. He said lime juice could lower bacterial detoxification activity for people who found it too intense, without the systemic destruction that antibiotics cause.

**For eliminating stored penicillin from the body**, he described a formula he called a moisturizing lubrication formula with lime juice that he gave to patients to temper penicillin levels. He said this formula functions like an antibiotic in that it will destroy both good and bad bacteria, which is why it should only be used in small amounts and occasionally. He gave a specific protocol for a severe case: the formula could be used two days per week for three weeks, then one day per week for twenty years to keep penicillin from growing and destroy it a little at a time. He said three to six weeks on the initial intensive schedule would substantially reduce the penicillin, but that long-term maintenance was necessary because penicillin mold can grow faster than it can be eliminated.

**For people who have no remaining bacteria** due to extensive antibiotic history and who therefore cannot adequately clean their systems bacterially, he said the body must rely on viral processes instead. Viruses, which are not alive but are protein solvents that cells manufacture, become the only available cleanup mechanism. He said: "The only way your body's going to be able to clean is with virus."

**For improving digestion following antibiotic damage**, he recommended two approaches: improving digestion through raw foods full of self-digesting bacteria, or introducing intestinal bacteria to eat available nutrients and establish a functioning population. He said the two alternatives to the use of antibiotics in premature infants were improving digestion with raw foods or introducing intestinal bacteria directly.

**For parasites in people who do eat meat**, he allowed that antibiotic use might be temporarily warranted in specific circumstances where the person is not eating raw fats and raw meat, because parasites feed on degenerative tissue and if the person is not providing raw materials to replace the cells being consumed, the parasites will ulcerate the tissue. He said: "The antibiotic will work for you because it will destroy those that are feeding on you if you're not supplying the nutrients." This represents one of his few qualified concessions about antibiotic use, and it was explicitly conditioned on the person not being on the Primal Diet.

**For recovering from wound infection without antibiotics**, he described allowing the infection to run its course as the body clears damaged tissue, with the recommendation to use clay topically. One of his consultation clients described using clay for an infected wound and declining the antibiotic recommendation from the doctor, successfully healing the wound. Aajonus's response affirmed that the bacterial activity in the wound was a detoxification process, not a pathogenic invasion.

**For reducing the lime juice formula's impact on good bacteria**, he noted that the body will use it efficiently and appropriately to destroy what it does not want when taken in small amounts occasionally.

Aajonus mentioned in passing that honey gets rid of a lot of medication, in the context of discussing beekeeping and the health department's management of hives. While he did not develop this into a full antibiotic-recovery protocol in the sources provided, the reference indicates that he viewed honey as having properties relevant to medication detoxification.

Aajonus distinguished between naturally occurring bacteria, which he regarded as entirely beneficial even when labeled pathogenic, and man-made mutant bacteria, which he described as genuinely problematic. He specifically identified E. coli O157:H7 as a man-made mutant bacteria that "does a lot of nasty things." His position was that in nature there is no good bacteria and bad bacteria; there is only good bacteria except where humans have created mutations through pharmaceutical and industrial processes.

He applied this distinction to the antibiotic resistance problem: the process of administering antibiotics to animals and humans creates conditions where naturally occurring bacteria develop resistance, and the survivors of antibiotic courses are by definition the organisms that have mutated to withstand the drug. This is not a natural process but an industrial one, and the resistant strains that result are more problematic than the original organisms the antibiotics were designed to address.

Aajonus addressed the practical question of how to prevent receiving antibiotics in a medical emergency when the person is unable to advocate for themselves. He acknowledged that preventing medical intervention in emergencies "will be met with tremendous resistance" and that people will "likely be defrauded and outright lied to, in attempts to coerce and intimidate" them into accepting procedures and drugs. He recommended preparing legal documentation in advance that explicitly states the person does not want tetanus shots, antibiotics, or other harmful treatments in case of emergency.

He noted that many diseases and deaths result from medicines and medical procedures, that many deaths and comas result from anesthesia, and that since the body is 99% bacterial and all functions rely on bacteria, receiving antibiotics will interfere with healing processes and other bodily functions. He framed the refusal of antibiotics not as a fringe position but as a logical consequence of understanding the body's bacterial composition.

---