Epigenetics

Aajonus described genes as linear sequences of nucleotides along a segment of DNA with varying characteristics, but he rejected the purely mechanical view that this sequence simply executes a fixed program. He framed gene expression as driven by electromagnetic and metaphysical energies. The nucleotides do not merely carry out instructions; they have natural ability and skill that are integral to the organism. This meant that two people with similar genetic heritage can express that heritage very differently depending on the energetic and nutritional environment in which their cells are operating.

He connected this to the idea that in his gene line there were geniuses, including his father, who invented the first Bering computer in 1938 at Purdue because he hated spending 35 minutes doing a math problem and wanted to solve it in five. His mother came from a family of 13 children, every one of them college educated, with eight aunts and uncles who were nurses, three doctors, and scientists. Yet Aajonus described himself as an idiot until he was 22 years old because of the way he was eating and the chemicals that were constantly intruded into his body, which damaged the whole integrity of his working system. The genetic potential was present from birth, but the expression of it was suppressed entirely by diet and chemical exposure. When he changed what he ate, the potential that had always been encoded in his line began to express itself.

He was direct in stating that genetic and hereditary links between parents and children are largely explained by the fact that they eat the same things. The statement he made in workshops was: "People have a genetic and hereditary link to their parents because they eat the same things. When you change the diet, the individual will change from that pattern and be different." He used autism as an illustrative case, citing patients who told him they were autistic until age 22, then started drinking raw milk and raw carrot juice, after which their behavior normalized. The implication is that the inherited pattern attributed to genetics was actually a dietary pattern that could be interrupted.

This framework meant that what looks like a hereditary disease running through a family is better understood as a shared nutritional deficiency and shared toxic burden running through a family. When one member changes the diet dramatically, the hereditary pattern breaks.

The one area where Aajonus acknowledged that fate can override choice in gene expression is industrial chemicals and the free radicals they generate. He described the onslaught of pollution as having created a need for more nutrients and enzyme mutations to neutralize, constrain, and eliminate more toxins. He stated that women who store more fats than men have an advantage in this environment because the poisons are more likely to go into fat instead of into cells, where they would damage RNA and DNA and retard or weaken cellular function.

He addressed cancer as an example of accumulated industrial chemical damage rather than genetic predisposition. When asked about three siblings all dying of blood cancer, including one who had lived her entire life in Utah while the other two remained in Mississippi, he explained that cancer is always the result of industrial chemicals, which are in everything everywhere, and that the more they accumulate, the more damage is done in the body to the point where the body stops dissolving dead cells and collects them. He noted that Utah has more hospital beds per capita and more cancers than commonly assumed, and that Mississippi has been the military's proving ground for biological warfare experimentation. This framing removes the genetic explanation entirely and replaces it with shared environmental and dietary chemical exposure as the common thread across the family members.

He also addressed the question of whether blood cancers have a genetic component explicitly and briefly: the answer in his framework is no, they do not. The clustering of the same disease within a family reflects shared environment and shared dietary habits, not shared genetic fate.

Aajonus drew extensively on the animal experiments of Pottenger and Howell to demonstrate how dietary patterns create compounding generational damage and how that damage can also be reversed generationally. In Pottenger's work with cats fed processed food including evaporated powdered milk mixed with water, behavioral problems were extreme, the cats could not be put together in the same cage without killing each other, and it took only five generations to reach complete extinction. By the third generation, reproductive potency was relatively lost. By the fifth generation, reproduction had ceased entirely.

In Howell's rat experiments, the rats fed cooked food got all the diseases that man gets, while those fed raw food had none. An important nuance Aajonus noted is that the cooked-food rats lived approximately the same lifespan as the raw-food rats, which confused Howell until he discovered they were eating their own fecal matter. When he repeated the experiment with a screen underneath to prevent coprophagia, the cooked-food rats died significantly earlier.

Aajonus extended Pottenger's work personally, stating that Pottenger had taken his animal experiments only four generations. Aajonus conducted his own experiments and extended them to seven generations, finding that by the seventh generation the animals had reached a complete state of health where there was never any discomfort or disease.

The application to human generational health was stated plainly: so many people are becoming impotent, which mirrors exactly what the Howell rats and Pottenger cats experienced by the fourth and fifth generations on processed food. He said "each generation gets sicker and sicker and weaker" when the diet does not support cellular health across generations.

Pottenger and Howell's work, combined with Aajonus's own animal experiments, led him to a specific formula for how long full genetic and cellular recovery takes. When an animal was unhealthy, it took five generations for them to reach optimal health again on a proper diet. For humans, he stated that this does not mean waiting for biological offspring to have offspring to have offspring. Instead, five generations of cells means five complete cycles of cellular regeneration within one body.

It takes seven to seven and a half years to rebuild every cell in the body down to the bones. Five times seven is approximately 40 years. He stated that according to Pottenger, Howell, and Newton in their animal experiments, it took five generations to become optimally healthy. His conclusion: "You have to be patient." He noted that at the time he was speaking he was only halfway through that 40-year process and could still see scar tissues all over his body, but that three-fourths of the toxicity in his body that was not scar tissue was already gone, and he was more vibrantly healthy than he had ever been at any point in his life, including childhood.

He stated the mechanism: each generation of cells is less toxic than the previous one. Once a cell is broken down and replaced, it throws off its toxins. Each successive generation of cells accumulates less toxicity, and by the fifth cellular generation the body is back to optimal health.

He also framed this in terms of maternal chemical transfer. When a mother has had vaccines and the chemicals are flowing in her body and she has a baby, during gestation some of that chemical burden is moved into the baby. That is how toxicity passes between biological generations. It takes many generations on a perfect diet to reach the point of getting rid of all of it. For a dog or cat he estimated that five years would accomplish this. For humans the timeline is much longer.

Aajonus conducted experiments with vaccines in animals including rats, cats, and rabbits, and found that mutations compounded with each succeeding inoculated generation. In the second generation, with all three types of animals, mutations started as slight deformations of an ear, an eye, or a jowl, or a shortened limb, or scoliosis. Glandular malfunctions were prominent. In some animals, temperaments became unruly. By the sixth and seventh generations, mutations were severe: loss of glands, organs, and limbs; loss of features; loss of motor and neural functions; brutal suicidal and homicidal tendencies; and impotence resulting in extinction. His stated conclusion was that of all pharmaceuticals accepted as miracles, vaccines are among the most damaging across generations.

He connected this to children in clinical experience. A mother could have received an injection of DES or an antibiotic while gestating, and as a result the offspring had the entire digestive tract damaged. He described this as having the intestinal environment "raped and annihilated by causing antibiotics in your mother." This is a mechanism by which pharmaceutical exposure in one generation creates what looks like a congenital or inherited condition in the next.

He cited a specific case of a woman who came to him chronically fatigued since age 14. She was born with black eyes. Her mother had blue eyes, her father had green eyes, and her two sisters had one blue and one green. Black eyes at birth were not a random genetic variation in his reading. The mother had been smoking, drinking, and doing drugs in 1969 during college and did not know she was pregnant for five months, continuing to have periods throughout that time. This completely destroyed the placenta, which is the fetus's liver analog. The destruction of placental function during the formative period altered the expression of eye color, which he used as a marker for the depth of cellular damage caused by the mother's chemical exposure during gestation.

Aajonus addressed inbreeding directly and took a position contrary to conventional genetics. His stated view was that inbreeding itself does not create mutations or disease in animals eating a proper diet. All other animals, if fed on a proper diet and allowed to inbreed, produce no mutations. It is only putting animals on an improper diet that causes mutations in inbred lines. He used horses as an example, stating that as long as horses are healthy, inbreeding can continue indefinitely without producing disease.

He used the example of poodles with enlarged hearts, attributing that deformity to what they are fed and to vaccines they receive rather than to the inbreeding itself. He acknowledged that inbreeding is probably not a good social idea, but was firm that it is not the disease creator it is claimed to be. The deformed child born to cousins or siblings he traced not to the shared genetics but to the fact that both people have been "destroying brain tissue" through diet and habits, and then when they reproduce, those accumulated deficiencies and chemical damages express in the offspring.

Aajonus explicitly rejected the blood type diet theory and the idea that ancestral eating patterns determine what a person can or cannot eat in the present. He described the blood type theory as nonsense, noting that he had over a hundred people come to him who had been following a blood type A protocol that excluded red meat, and they were anemic, with two of them leukemic from following that diet. When he put all of them on red meat, every one responded positively. He was unequivocal: any human can eat a raw animal food diet without any problem regardless of blood type or ancestral background. He called the idea that people need different foods based on ancestry "a fallacy" and described it as a trap designed to make people think they need certain kinds of food when in fact the need is universal.

He also stated that he does not believe dietary differences between individuals have anything to do with genetic predisposition. His experience and observations lead him to believe that those differences reflect deficiencies and accumulated toxins rather than any underlying genetic programming.

He described the pituitary as an emergency organ that kicks in when food sources are decimated, for instance by a volcano, earthquake, or fire. In that situation, the pituitary secretes growth hormones so that offspring will still grow to their normal size for at least two generations, even if not to their normal strength. This was framed as a backup mechanism built into the species to ensure that two generations of offspring can still reach full size despite a catastrophic interruption in food supply.

He contrasted this emergency pituitary function with the ideal situation in which every individual cell produces its own growth hormones. On a proper raw diet, cells are healthy enough to produce what they need to divide and reproduce without relying on the pituitary to supplement them. He stated that wild Eskimos he met in the 1970s, living on approximately 92 to 95 percent animal matter, had 90 percent of their body cells alive at all times, the same level that a healthy newborn baby has. Adults in industrial societies eating cooked food are relying on the pituitary to supplement damaged cells that cannot produce their own growth hormones, which is a sign of systemic cellular degeneration, not health.

He extended this to the question of longevity, stating that humans should be living to at least 147 years old based on the biological principle that all creatures live seven times the period it takes to complete maturation. For humans, maturation completes at 21, making the expected lifespan 147. The fact that most people do not reach half that is a direct consequence of the diet and chemical environment, not of any inherent genetic limitation.

Aajonus moved the genetic and epigenetic framework into practical application when advising parents on what kind of child they wanted to raise. His position was that concentrated nutrients delivered early in life can express genetic potential that would otherwise remain dormant, and that this can produce results that appear to exceed what the parents' gene lines would predict.

The case he described most fully involved a martial artist father who was primarily physical but who wanted a smart child rather than an athletic one. Aajonus gave the parents a formula: liver and milk in a one-third liver to two-thirds milk ratio with a little honey added, which he called the liver baby formula. The child drank five to six bottles of this daily. At two and a half years old the child was reading four-year-old material to friends in the neighborhood. At five years old the child knew 187 countries, knew which ran them, what kind of political system each had, knew every United States president and vice president, where they were from, and the years they served, without having been taught any of this. Aajonus stated explicitly: "nobody has taught him any of this." The parents were described as average working-class people with good minds but nothing sharp, and there was no genius in the family on either side. The father's side was lower white-collar workers. The mother's side was blue-collar, interior type, wall plasterers and painters. He attributed the outcome entirely to the diet.

A second case he cited was a child in China eating six to seven of those liver-and-milk formula bottles daily, whose father was approximately six foot three. That child was described as "just as smart as a whip," with the larger physical build attributed to the father's size rather than the diet.

A third case was a woman who was an executive producer for ABC Films who had her child when she was 49 years old and went on the diet after delivery. She put the baby on the diet as well. That child, born to a mother on the diet, grew up and graduated from Yale with top honors at age 20.

A fourth case was a child whose mother had been on the diet for three months before he was born. He entered the fourth grade at five years old.

He also described a 14-and-a-half-year-old girl brought to him by her mother who had been a B-minus student. The mother went on the diet under great personal stress due to a divorce from a brain surgeon who had left her for a younger woman and taken the finances. The girl was forced to go on the diet. This case is introduced but the resolution is not fully detailed in the available passages.

He gave parents explicit guidance framed around the kind of child they wanted: "Do you want a physically active child? Do you want a brainy child? Do you want both?" For a brainy child the formula was 50 percent liver and 50 percent milk with a little honey. For a physically athletic child the approach would differ. He stated: "I'll give them a diet according to that, what they want."

He described a specific mechanism by which a mother's pharmaceutical exposure during pregnancy damages the offspring's digestive capacity permanently on standard diets. The antibiotics a mother receives cross into the developing fetus and annihilate the intestinal bacterial environment that the child needs for digestion. He described this as having the entire digestive tract "raped and annihilated" by the antibiotics in the mother. The resulting damage in the child looks like a congenital or inherited digestive condition but is in fact a pharmaceutical injury transmitted through gestation.

He cited a clinical case involving six patients who all suffered from digestive distress. Five of them were helped when trichinosis organisms began predigesting their food for them, compensating for the bacteria that had been destroyed in utero. The sixth, a man, was neither harmed nor helped, and the reasons were not fully established from the available testing.

Aajonus framed the decline of health across human generations in terms of the percentage of live cells in the body. A baby should be born with 95 percent of its cells alive, with a natural 5 percent cell death rate occurring at all times in a healthy body. A hard laborer or athlete may run an 8 percent daily cellular death rate but can keep up with that on a proper diet. What he observed in industrial society is that children are being born with only a small percentage of their cells alive, reflecting the compounding generational effect of processed food, chemicals, and vaccines.

He stated: "We're looking at pretty near the end when you get to 2% cellular life." The implication is that industrial civilization is following the exact trajectory he observed in Pottenger's and Howell's experiments with animals, with each generation entering life weaker and less cellularly vital than the last, trending toward the extinction that those animal experiments predicted at the fifth generation.

When he was 21 years old, he estimated he had only 30 percent of his body cells alive. By the time he was making those statements he had reached 80 percent of his cells alive and was still progressing toward his target of 95 percent, noting that this process takes the full 40-year five-cellular-generation cycle to complete.

He contrasted the degenerating cellular trajectory of industrial populations with tribes he personally visited who lived on raw animal foods and experienced none of the genetic or cellular decline he observed in industrial societies. On a small remote island in Mindanao, accessible only by four-wheel drive, then a full day by boat, then swimming, he found a tribe that lived to between 128 and 150 years old on two foods only: raw fish and fresh coconut meat, with women eating half a coconut daily and men eating a whole coconut daily, plus one to three pounds of fish daily. A middle-aged man of approximately 79 to 84 years old looked 40 to 43 at the most. He had great, thick, strong, white teeth with not one cavity and not one missing. The women in their 40s and 50s looked to be in their late 20s.

He visited a second tribe through the same contact who lived on three foods: raw fish, raw coconut meat, a little coconut water, and a fruit such as banana or mango every other day. A man approximately 82 years old looked to be in his late 30s, had perfect teeth without a flaw, and was in perfect physical shape. All the women in their 40s and 50s looked to be in their late 20s. This tribe lived to between 138 and 150 years old.

He also referenced the tribes in the Andes who eat raw meats, in which 90-year-olds participate in 100-mile runs at 1,100 feet above sea level alongside members of all ages. He noted wild Eskimos he met in the 1970s who lived on 92 to 95 percent animal matter and maintained the cellular vitality of newborns throughout their lives.

His interpretation of these tribes was not that they had superior genetics. His interpretation was that optimal genetic expression is the natural result of optimal diet, and that the human genome contains the blueprint for this level of health and longevity in every person. What suppresses it is industrial food, chemicals, and vaccines acting on the body across generations.