A streamlined stack of supplements designed to meet your most critical needs - Adapt Naturals is now live. Learn more

The Acid-Alkaline Myth: Part 2


Published on

acid alkaline myth, mercola alkaline diet
Shaking up the acid-alkaline diet myth. istock.com/pilipphoto

In Part 1 of this series, I talked about why the basic premise of the acid-alkaline theory is flawed, and I showed that the evidence doesn’t support the idea that a net acid-forming diet is harmful to bone health. Now I want to look at the effect of dietary acid load on other health conditions.

Can the acidity or alkalinity of your diet affect your risk for muscle loss, cancer, and more?

Muscle Wasting

There is some research claiming that acid-forming diets cause muscle wasting, and the proposed mechanism is similar to that of the acid-ash hypothesis of osteoporosis. Some researchers hypothesize that in order to eliminate excess acid and maintain homeostasis, the kidneys must steal amino acids from muscle tissue. (1, 2) Just as a higher acid load increases calcium in the urine, it also increases nitrogen in the urine, leading some to believe that an acid-forming diet causes net nitrogen loss. However, some of these studies neglect to measure nitrogen balance, so this is not necessarily true. (3, 4) In fact, one study showed that a higher acid diet improved nitrogen balance! (5) This theory also does not acknowledge that protein, although it’s acid forming, actually increases the body’s ability to excrete acid. (6) Finally, the one observational study concluding that alkaline diets improve lean muscle mass didn’t even measure the overall acid load of the diet. (7) Instead, they used potassium intake as an approximate measure, and just assumed that the observed improvement in muscle mass was due to the diet being more alkaline. This, in addition to the limitations that always accompany observational data, makes the evidence less than convincing, especially since the clinical trials have conflicting results.


One of the more popular claims of the alkaline diet is that it can cure cancer. Proponents say that because cancer can only grow in an acidic environment, a net-alkaline diet can prevent cancer cells from growing, and can eliminate existing cancer cells. This theory is incorrect for a few reasons. First of all, the hypothesis depends on the ability of food to substantially change the pH of the blood and extracellular fluid, which I’ve already shown is not the case. (8, 9, 10) Second, cancer is perfectly capable of growing in an alkaline environment. The pH of normal body tissue is 7.4, which is slightly alkaline, and in almost every experiment done with cancer cells, they are grown in an environment at that pH. (11)

Now, cancer cells do tend to grow better in an acidic environment, but the causality is reversed. Once a tumor develops, it creates its own acidic environment through up-regulated glycolysis and reduced circulation, so the pH of the patient’s blood no longer determines the pH of the cancer. (12) It’s not the acidic environment that causes the cancer; it’s the cancer that causes the acidic environment. To top it all off, the only comprehensive review on ‘diet-induced’ acidosis and cancer did not even acknowledge this as a valid mechanism by which an acid-forming diet could increase cancer risk. They discuss a few biological pathways that could potentially link dietary acid load and cancer, but they admit that it’s mostly speculation and there’s no direct link. (13)

Other Effects

There are a few observational studies attempting to link acid-forming diets with hypertension, but the results are mixed. (14, 15) There’s also limited observational data associating higher acid loads with things like high cholesterol, obesity, and insulin resistance, but there are no proposed mechanisms or clinical studies to validate the hypotheses. (16, 17)

There are a few review papers examining the effect of acid-forming diets and health, but as you’ve seen above, the evidence they have to review is sparse. (18, 19, 20, 21, 22) If you read these papers, you’ll notice that whenever they cite trials showing the deleterious effects of acidosis, those trials were done on patients with chronic kidney disease or diabetes-induced acidosis. In the studies done on healthy people, they’re given ammonium chloride to induce acidosis. What you won’t see are clinical trials showing health consequences from purely ‘diet-induced’ acidosis. (Perhaps because ‘diet-induced’ acidosis doesn’t exist!) You’ll also notice that the strongest two hypotheses deal with osteoporosis and muscle wasting, and that links with other diseases are speculative or based on observational data. And although conflicts of interest don’t necessarily mean their conclusion can’t be trusted, it’s interesting to note that one of these reviews was funded by “pH Sciences®,” which “develops and manufactures patent-protected ingredients that safely and effectively manage biological pH levels.” (23)

In sum, I am not convinced that an acid-forming diet has negative effects on healthy people, based on the science. But just to be sure, it’s always a good idea to observe healthy cultures to see if there’s any anthropological evidence to support or refute the hypothesis.

Like what you’re reading? Get my free newsletter, recipes, eBooks, product recommendations, and more!

Evolutionary Data

There are a few studies where researchers attempted to approximate the net acid load of Paleolithic diets. One estimated that 87% of pre-agricultural people ate net-alkaline diets, and proposed this discrepancy with our modern diets as a possible reason for our declining health. (24) However, a more recent study estimated that only half of the world’s hunter-gatherer societies eat net-alkaline diets, while the other half are net acid-forming. (25) They reason that the other estimate is likely accurate for our earlier ancestors, because their tropical habitat would’ve provided ample fruits and vegetables. This idea is confirmed by another analysis that showed increasing acid load with increasing latitude. (26) Even without the study, it stands to reason that as humans moved into less hospitable environments, the animal content (and acid load) of their diet increased.

Given the subpar clinical science on this topic, I think the evolutionary argument is far more convincing. If half of the world’s hunter-gatherer populations avoid the ‘diseases of civilization’ on an acid-forming diet, it would seem that acid load has little to no bearing on overall health. For some case studies, we can always look to Weston Price’s work to see quite clearly that acid-forming diets are not detrimental to health. Based on Price’s descriptions, many of the traditional diets he studied would have been primarily acid-forming, including the Swiss, the Masai, and the Inuit. Yet despite their high intake of animal foods or grains and their comparatively low intake of fruits and vegetables, they maintained excellent health.


I don’t deny that many people have seen significant health improvements when switching to an alkaline diet, but there are many possible reasons for this not having to do with pH balance. Eating more fresh produce is rarely a bad idea, especially when it displaces nutrient poor processed foods. A person switching to an alkaline diet would significantly reduce their consumption of grains, which could cause dramatic health improvements for somebody with a leaky gut or gluten sensitivity. Dairy would also be minimized, which would help those with dairy sensitivities. And although pure sugar isn’t an acid-forming nutrient, many laypeople claim that it is, so alkaline diets tend to contain far less sugar than a standard Western diet.

Between the scientific evidence (or lack thereof) and the anthropological research, I think we can be confident that the acid load of our diets doesn’t negatively impact healthy people. For those with renal failure or similar conditions that affect kidney function, it’s a different story—there’s certainly room for manipulation of urine pH in the treatment of those conditions. But for someone with functioning kidneys, there should be no concern that an acid-forming diet will harm health.

ADAPT Naturals logo

Better supplementation. Fewer supplements.

Close the nutrient gap to feel and perform your best. 

A daily stack of supplements designed to meet your most critical needs.

Chris Kresser in kitchen


Join the conversation

    • Nice article! you mention leaky gut, but it doesn’t exist, it’s a theory/myth. Or am I wrong? thanks! 🙂

      • Leaky gut is real. It is simply an inflammatory condition of the intestine that allows protein solutes, which normally do not enter the blood to enter the blood. This is because inflammation leads to increased permeability.

  1. I have been on an alkaline diet for a few months. My psoriasis has cleared up along with my gout. I agree that your body will regulate ph levels but I have noticed these changes so what I assume is that my body is not having to work as hard to maintain its homeostasis.

    • As pointed out previously the so-called “alkaline diet” does not alkalize the blood at all. The benefits come from the higher nutritional value.

      For example, in the case of psoriasis this is an autoimmune condition, which means poor adrenal function is playing a major role. The diet is richer in both ascorbic acid and pantothenic acid, which both support adrenal function. Supporting the adrenals helps with the immune dysfunction and the inflammatory component.

      The higher omega 3 fatty acids in the diet also help with controlling the inflammatory component.

      Psoriaisis also involves an imbalance of cyclic guanosine monophosphate (cGMP) and cyclic adenosine monophosphate (cAMP). The so-called “alkaline diet” also contains a higher level of a bioflavonoid that helps protect cAMP breakdown restoring the balance between the cAMP, which should be dominant and the cGMP. I explain this a little more in depth here:


      NONE of this has anything to do with alkalizing.

  2. Interesting article!
    About a year ago I stumbled on an e-book recommending a diet of foods that would supposedly cause the body to produce less acid than many other foods.
    The claim was that, in time, these less acid producing foods would slightly reduce the body’s blood acid level and thus create an environment in the body where many diseases would have difficulty thriving. I was very interested as I was suffering from heartburn daily. Two or more times every day I would ingest antacid tablets to relieve the heartburn that I got from almost every food that I ate.
    I didn’t really buy into the diet in its entirety, which also recommended eliminating almost everything except vegetables, tofu and a few very choice fruits. The part of the diet that made the most sense to me to try, considering my heartburn issue, was adding sodium bicarbonate to my drinking water daily. I thought, if this would increase my overall health while eliminating my heartburn that would be great! With my limited knowledge on the subject, it sounded sensible and harmless enough so I gave it a try, ingesting sodium bicarbonate daily for the past year. Once I started drinking the baking soda water my heartburn stopped. I haven’t needed to buy antacid tablets since.
    Your article has me slightly concerned about the possible negative effects of my daily ingestion of the sodium bicarbonate. I don’t want to get my heartburn back but I also don’t want negative health consequences from continuous ingestion of baking soda.
    I’m not knowledgeable on this subject, but just wanted to share my experience and get your opinion.
    Any suggestions or comments?

    • First of all we need to keep in ind that most pathogens are controlled by acids and thrive in an alkaline environment. This is why so many pathogenic diseases occur in humans despite our blood being maintained in an alkaline state. And why a lack of stomach acid actually increases the risk of pathogenic infection, and why antibiotics, which create an alkaline environment, lead to candidiasis.

      As for the stomach acid the reason it is helping your heartburn is because it neutralizes stomach acid. Unfortunately it does this with a lot of risks. See:


      Furthermore, the long term use of baking soda interferes with the absorption of nutrients required for methylation needed to form more stomach acid:


      In essence, what you have done with long term use of baking soda is to make the underlying condition worse and put yourself at risk for numerous health issues. Decreased methylation also increases the risk of cancer, heart disease, arthritis, allergies, immune suppression, hormone and neurotransmitter imbalances, etc.

      In my opinion you need to restore your stomach acid levels. See:


      I also recommend you avoid caffeine and mints, which both relax the lower esophageal sphincter and if you have a hiatal hernia contributing to the problem that needs to he addresses as well.

  3. @James,
    I have been following your comments for quite some time. I’m astounded at your knowledge of how the body works based on scientific facts rather than myths. Could you please tell me what database you’re pulling information from if you are using one. If not then please tell me what curriculum you studied from to gain such an accurate understanding from a science perspective on how the body works in relation to food and medicine. I’m currently working on a degree in the science of food and nutrition and I would love to be able to gain the knowledge you have regards to science and how food and nutrition affect the body.

    • Hi Donna,

      Most of the information I derive from medical studies primarily on PubMed and from researching human anatomy and physiology from textbooks. But i also have some background in chemistry and started in allopathic medicine when I was 14. I started researching holistic medicine 11 years later and 2 years after that I left allopathic medicine for holistic medicine, which I have been in since. So it is a combination of a lot of life experience and a lot of continuing medical research.


      • @ James, T
        Thanks for responding to my inquiry about you.
        Over the past few semesters I have been taking biology, chemistry and anatomy and physiology. Many times I have read a post you’ve commented on and knew that you, being one of few, actually use scientific facts to back up your answers to peoples questions about health and well being.
        I will continue to follow your work as you create an awareness of how science, food and nutrition interact with our bodies.
        I sure wish you’d compile everything that you’ve studied and create a blog so that people like me could access it. 🙂

        • Hi Donna,

          As Mr. Paleo mentioned I have another website with lots of information at MedCapsules.com and there is a link to my blog articles there. I don’t do a lot of blog writing though,


          • Thank you James!
            Keep studying and informing so people like me can glean from your hard work and pass it along to help others. 🙂

            Donna Lynn

  4. Hi James. I had a quick scroll through the comments looking for Q&A on fresh lemon juice helping to fight cancer through its alkalizing ability and containing of “d-limonene”. I have only found ”promosing studies” comments with regards to lemons so if you have any more info on this or what i can suggest for her that would be well appreciated. Thankyou!

    • Hi John,

      To start with lemons do not alkalize the blood. That is a very common myth. Lemon juice, just like every food, will stimulate the same exact “alkaline response”. This is a normal part of the digestive process. Foods are made acidic or more acidic in the stomach. As the chyme (partially digested food, stomach acid and enzymes) leaves the stomach the pancreas releases sodium bicarbonate to neutralize acidity. This is the “alkaline response”. This has nothing to do with blood pH, which is tightly regulated by respiration and kidney function. Diet plays virtually no role in alkalizing the blood.

      D-limonene is great stuff, but is derived from the peels, not the juice. Studies on D-limonene for cancer are very promising.

      There is also some research showing anti-cancer effects of lemon seeds..

      You did not mention who “she” is or what kind of cancer she has. For the majority of cancers these are the things I would recommend:




  5. The absolute best resources I have come across that have explained this subject more in depth are: The Metabolic Typing Diet, Biobalance, and the dietary guidance that Mercola offers. In these resources, it is shown that different bodies react to foods differently – in fact there are 4 possibilities: 1) one where the body is too acidic and the vegetable based diet rebalances it, 2) one where the body is too acidic, and contrary to popular understanding, the meat-based diet moves it more toward balance 3) one where the body is too alkaline and the vegetable based diet moves it toward the acidic direction into the balanced state and 4) where the body is too alkaline and meat based diet moves it toward the acidic direction into a balanced state. There is even discussion about how time of day (and, in my experience, season) causes this to shift. The explanation is the most detailed in Biobalance, where the pH of the blood is listed out to more decimal places and the minute changes in that number cause the dramatic changes, most commonly in mood reactions. It also explains how some bodies are inclined toward the acidic side, some are inclined toward the alkaline side, (both of these needing the more extreme diets to rebalance them), and others are more neutral and aren’t thrown out of that balance very easily (these are the people that appear to be able to eat meat or vegetarian and still feel great.)

    It does bother me that there is this prevalence of information (and the harsh judgment that comes with that) out there that only the vegetarian lifestyle/diet is “good” for us because it is “alkaline”. Clearly, not everyone has my metabolism, and not everyone lives at high elevation, which apparently causes a tendency to be too alkaline from what I remember reading. I do appreciate that the paleo diet is able to offer healthful options for each of these body types, depending on the chosen ratios of meats/fats to the healthy vegetables.

    Another source that I am studying right now suggests that it is the potassium in the body that provides the healthful nourishment for the cells, and that the disease states come into play when there is a deficiency of this organically obtained potassium. This theory would certainly explain how it is that some people find that they feel better when they switch to the veggie-based diet, and it provides a pathway for those of us who do require more of the meat & fat based nutrients to obtain that same benefit – simply by ensuring that our diet includes the potassium rich vegetables alongside the meat/fats… which does jive with what the Paleo diet teaches…

    Great exploration of this topic Chris, thank you!

    • In my opinion Mercola is a scare mongering idiot and I would not follow his advice for anything.

      And diet DOES NOT alkalize the blood with any significance. Virtually all pH regulation is maintained by respiration followed by ion retention or elimination by the kidneys. In addition, ALL foods are eventually metabolized in to acids. Therefore, foods have virtually no alkalizing effect on the body. For more details on how the body regulates pH see:


      Potassium is only one of the essential electrolytes for the body and also must be kept in balance.

      By the way, did you know that most of the naturally occurring potassium we consume is radioactive? Just a tiny amount of radiation but interesting trivia.

  6. Hi. what about the blood cells negative charge?
    If they loose “some” negative charge (because of acidic environment) the blood cells stick together and its velocity drops also the pressure is higher witch dificults the arrival of nutrients to all cells of the body.
    Its what i have heard. i do not confirmed this, but has logic.
    My perception for now that i am only a student of medicine is that any disease has 2 root causes: lack of nutrients and excess of toxins. I think pH afect the body but i need to confirm some evidences.
    Thank yall for the comments but for achieve the truth we need to open our mind from our own beliefs, listen to all perspectivs and finally choose the one that has proven results.

  7. It is obvious that you have no concept of what your body does in order to maintain the requirement of keeping your blood at the slightly alkaline state it requires to keep you alive. Your body will actually destroy itself trying to keep your blood pH at 7.35 when you eat overly acidic and yes, in extreme cases over alkaline foods. Excess acid has to be eliminated from your body and is done so by by several methods. First, thru urine, second thru sweat, third thru your breathing and finally if all else’s failed, by cheating mInerals ( mainly calcium which is alkaline) from your body. The only thing you have right here is that the blood must maintain at a pH of 7.35+ or – .3 or you die! I and several friend have studied this and we have cured our skin cancer with a mixture of baking soda and coconut oil and my wife who was given 6 months to live with stage 4 lung cancer is,still alive 4 years later. I was an overweight diabetic with high NP, high Triglycerides, high cholesterol. I was on the max dose of insulin allowed, taking pills for everything. No I am med free with aabsolutely a perfect blood profile. The only thing I changed was my lifestyle of eating ( to an alkaline,diet.) AND I EAT ANY FOOD I WANT, NOTHING IS OFF LIMITS AS YOU PROFESS! I just make,sure that 80% of my food is,from the list of alkaline foods. The S.A.D. is very acidic!!!

    • You have things out of order. The first means of pH regulation is RESPIRATION, followed by kidney retention or elimination of hydrogen ions. These account for virtually all pH regulation in the body.

      Sweating does not eliminate acidity. Alkaline ammonia compounds are eliminated in sweat. This is why people can get body odor from sweat. Bacteria on the skin can react with this compounds releasing ammonia causing body odor.

      Other means of pH regulation are protein and phosphate buffering. The use of minerals from the bones is ONLY done as a last resort and thus would require severe, prolonged acidosis that is so rare that neither you nor most doctors would likely ever see a case of this in your or their lifetimes. For more information see:


      The so-called “alkaline diet” has NOTHING to do with alkalizing the blood. As I pointed out so many times already many of the so-called “alkaline foods” are naturally acidic and ALL foods, including the so-called “alkaline foods” are eventually metabolized in to acids. So there is no such thing as a truly alkaline food.

      The reason the so-called “alkaline diet” is healthier is because it tends to be richer in beneficial vitamins and minerals as well as beneficial phytochemicals including various beneficial ACIDS such as citric and malic acids as well as various antioxidant acids such as some polyphenols.

    • The fastest way to increase alkalinity of the body: Deeply breathe in, breathe out, IMMEDIATELY breathe in again. Repeat 100 times or more.
      You have removed much of the carbon dioxide from the body. To complensate this, bicarbonate anions catched a hydrogen cations, forming CO2 again. Since acidity = hydrogen cations amount, your blood is now less acidic, pH is increased.

      Now the question – how do you feel now?
      About cancer curing – no comments. You’re a potential murderer, do you realize?

    • Dan’s comment that food is alkaline is wrong. Google pH of food, and you’ll find 99% of all food is either acidic or highly acidic. The only food not acidic is MILK!

  8. Hi James,
    My questions/comments are slightly on this subject of acid/alkaline myths. Please comment if you have any professional/personal information about the following subjects: the alkaline/acid diet and choosing the gender of choice.
    I studied all kinds of data and scholarly articles about alkaline/acid diet and choosing the gender of your baby while trying to conceive. To Be more precise, testing pH level of the mothers reproductive tract and determining if its favorable to conceive a boy/girl. If the pH of the reproductive tract/cervix is not within the optimal zone then you can change it with a diet of alkaline/acidic ash, depending on your gender of choice. Alkalizing for boy, and acidic for girl… Is this BOGUS? Can the alkaline/acidic diet tip odds in one direction or another?
    In addition, can douching with baking soda cause slight alkalinity of the reproductive tract, or can it actually cause it to be more acidic?(i saw in one of your comments that you can actually tip it in the other direction if you ingest too much baking soda… can it do the same if you douche) There has been studies that show when douching with baking soda 30min prior to intercourse, it can help Y sperm survive and trive under that slight alkaline environment. Y sperm trive in more alkaline reproductive tract and x sperm in more acidic, so you douche acordingly.
    My other question is in regards to increasing consumption (while trying to conceive) of sodium and potassium for increasing the odds of conceiving a boy or magnesium and calcium for increasing the odds of conceiving a girl. How would ingestion of certain electrolytes change the affinity of the egg towards a particular sperm whether is Y or x or vice versa? I get lost at the cellular level.
    Appart from diet… Different subject. How about ions? I read that y sperm thrive while trying to conceive when the mother engulfs herself with positive ions such as wind, thunder, computers phones etc.- and x sperm thrive while mother is in nature. How can the egg and sperm’s polarity meet under those biased circumstances , can the polarity be changed to cause a bias and tip the odds towards a desired gender?

    • I have not seen any studies talking about the influence of a baby’s gender although I have never looked either.

      So I just ran a quick search under several search terms on PubMed to see if I could find anything on this and came up empty.

      What I do know is that the female organs are naturally acidic to help fight pathogens. But this is also toxic to the sperm, so the sperm is alkaline to help it survive in the presence of the acids.

      Diet is not going to change the pH of the female organs as the acidic environment is due to the naturally present beneficial acid forming bacteria that initially come from the colon, get on the perianum then migrate in to the female organs. There is no direct root from the digestive system to the female organs.

      Douching with baking soda is not a good idea regardless. Again, the area is acidic to control pathogens. This includes Candida, which is controlled by the flora acids. These acids turn off the Candida growth gene and keep the Candida in its benign yeast form. If the female organs are made alkaline this will turn on the Candida growth gene and morph the Candida in to its pathogenic fungal form.

    • Sorry Ema but Yaweh says that we were known before He formed us in our mothers womb, so that would blow that theory out of the water.

  9. i have been tracking my urinary pH. When I first started my urinary pH was below 4.5 almost constantly. So I started eliminating foods that in my past were Cooked or baked with gluten. Slowly my pH has made it back up to 6.5 to 7.0. Do allergies to foods cause my pH to drop below 4.5? When my pH is below 4.5, I need to urinate every 30 minutes. My need to urinate decreases as my pH rises. A pH of 7.5 and I sleep
    all night. Any comment. Right now I can eat only about ten
    Foods that don’t cause my pH to drop below 4.5.

    • Urinary pH DOES NOT reflect blood pH at all. Foods can influence urinary pH though as can other things such as medications, infections, hydration, etc.

      • OK, urinary pH and blood pH are separate entities.
        Then the question is: ” Does urinary pH indicate any undesirable medical conditions that should be dealt with?”

        • Yes, here is what I wrote on it before:

          “Urinary pH is affected by hydration levels, certain supplements and medications and by bacteria in the urine. Urinary tract infections lead to highly alkaline urine as the bacteria use the enzyme urease to split urea in to highly alkaline ammonia. The alkalinity helps the bacteria, as with most pathogens, to survive.”

    • “Refined” sugar would be a better description of what people are calling pure sugar. In refined sugar various impurities are removed although it is still not 100% pure.

      Keep in mind though that ALL foods are eventually metabolized in to acids. Not just refined table sugar.

  10. I thought I’d seen a post on this blog by someone called James saying he’d exposed the errors of Dr Sircus’s claims about sodium bicarbonate, and his comments could be found on the You Tube posts attached to the video in question. I couldn’t find James’ comments, but I watched the video instead and was amazed to discover that the two men holding the discussion to discredit the consumption of sodium bicarbonate have completely missed the plot. I currently don’t know whether oral consumption of sodium bicarb has any benefits, I’m still researching the matter. But I’ve never yet heard any supporter of the alkali balance diet claim that eating this way will make your skin more alkali, your stomach acid more alkali or the vaginal secretions more alkali. The men in this video were trying to discredit the consumption of sodium bicarb by making out that proponents of it were wrongly trying to make the whole body more alkali. But no proponent of the alkali diet that I’ve ever come across has ever made such a claim. Instead they argue that by eating foods which produce an alkali ash (which I think means ‘residue’) in the body in contrast to an acid ash, experience health benefits because such foods better enable the body to function as it was designed to function, which means that the stomach will be supported in maintaining its acid environment and the vagina will be supported in maintaining its acid environment etc, and the blood will be supported in maintaining its alkali ph balance.

    We know that death is the consequence of the blood going beyond a certain alkali ph balance; and biology tells us that the body goes to great lengths to maintain the blood’s specific ph balance; but the point of the alkali diet (and/or taking sodium bicarbonate or potassium bicarbonate) is to avoid overtaxing the body by continually feeding it acidic forming foods which it will then have to neutralize to maintain the blood’s alkali ph.

    As I say, I’m still researching the validity of the so-called acid-alkali diet, but this video unfortunately for the makers of it only served to discredit the men involved, and discredit the message they were trying to make. I’m hoping I’m big enough to listen to any thing else they might have to say in the future in case they’re able to present something more scientifically credible, but this particular video does nothing to support their cause against the consumption of sodium bicarbonate.

    • Marisa,

      Our video was not about the dangers of ingesting baking soda. The video was about the acid-alkaline myth. We discussed various subtopics including the fact that there is no such thing as an alkaline diet and why baking soda does not really have any effect on the pH unless you dangerously overhwhelm the stomach acid. I also covered the myth about ingesting baking soda killing cancer cells, which is completely false.

      if the video was about the myths of ingesting baking soda then I would have gone much more in depth as to the chemistry behind its effects on pH, including how ingesting baking soda can induce acidosis. I would have also covered the various other dangers of ingesting baking soda that include an increased risk of cancer, heart disease, nutritional deficiencies, bone loss, decreased cartilage synthesis, immune suppression, hormone and neurotransmitter imbalances, etc.

      Maybe someday I will do a video specific on the dangers of ingesting baking soda since very few people seem to have done any real research in to these dangers.

      As for your statement about my claiming eating certain foods makes the skin or vagina alkaline, this IS NOT what I said. In fact, I have pointed out a number of times that ALL foods eventually metabolize in to acids. And other that the stomach the other areas of the body that are maintained in an acidic state are maintained in this acidic state by beneficial acid forming bacteria.

      And has been pointed out the ash content of foods DOES NOT play a role in alkalizing the blood. The blood is kept in a slightly alkaline state primarily by respiration followed by ion elimination by the kidneys. This is why the alkaline diet thing is a myth.

      Ingesting sodium or potassium bicarbonate is not really a means of alkalizing for several reasons. For one these are neutralized by the stomach acid forming carbonic acid, and salts that in excess lead to hyperchloremic acidosis.

      This is why people need to do some real research on health claims instead of relying on propaganda sites that keep repeating bogus information such as about the mythical alkaline diet.

      I suggest you go back and listen to the video again because you are making it sound like I said a lot of things I never said.

      I also explained in another post how to easily find the post I made in reference to Sircus’ bogus claims. In that post I explain the alkaline and alkalizing myths more in depth.


      • Hello James,

        Thanks for your detailed reply. I appreciate it. When ever I get a moment I’ll take a greater look at some of the things you mention in your post. So, are you one of the men in the video? It sounded to me, and of course I could be wrong, but in the video it sounded as if the presenter and the guest were saying that one of the erroneous arguments posited by people who support the alkali diet is that they claim the alkali diet can make the body more alkali, when in reality certain environments in the body need to be acid. I was simply saying that I’ve never heard a proponent of the alkali diet claiming that it made all bodily environments alkali. Again, if I get a moment I’ll take another look at the video, and I apologise if I’ve made a mistake. But if I remember correctly, the essence of the video seemed to be based on this premise. If it wasn’t, then I’m not sure what point the presenter and guest were trying to make. Perhaps I was listening with biased ears.

        Interestingly enough, this week I’ve received an email from another newsletter I subscribe to, and they enclosed an evidence based peer review of why the alkali diet is a myth. It made an interesting read until I did a google search for evidence based peer reviews in support of the alkali diet. Believe it or not, I found the US government based medical publications, PubMed, contained just as much evidence claiming that an alkali diet, including the ingestion of bicarbonates, supports healthy bodily functions. The benefits appeared to be not due only to the provision of copious amounts of minerals and enzymes in fruit and veg, but also due to an alkalizing effect. It crossed my mind to post a few of these references, but so far I haven’t had time. Again, I haven’t yet made up my mind either way, but thanks again for the things you upload; it gives us something further to research.

        • Hi Marisa,

          Yes, I am the one being interviewed.

          What we pointed out in the video was that there are parts of the body that need to be alkaline and there are some that need to be acidic. But diet DOES NOT have an alkalizing effect as so many people claim. ALL foods will eventually metabolize in to acids. The primary acid is carbonic acid, which is kept in check almost exclusively by respiration, not diet. This is why respiration is the primary means of pH regulation for the blood. Kidneys also play a major role in pH regulation through either hydrogen ion retention or excretion. These two means of pH regulation account for virtually all pH regulation of the blood. Again, diet has virtually no role in alkalizing the blood.

          I also tried to get across the need for acids by the body because so many people have fallen for the hype and become so acid phobic. For example, the need for sufficient stomach acid for digestion, absorption, killing pathogens, etc. And the lack of that leads to nutritional deficiencies that in turn reduce methylation increasing the risk of cancer, heart disease, cartilage loss, depression, hormone imbalances, suppressed immunity, etc.

          In addition, our bodies are made up of acids, run on acids, require acids for detoxification, holding our bodies together, immunity, antioxidant effects, etc, etc, etc.

          Ironically, one of the most toxic compounds to the body produced in the body is highly alkaline ammonia. High ammonia can put a person in to a coma and kill them easily. So the body uses carbonic acid to protect itself from the highly toxic ammonia.

          I also brought up the fact that every place in the body where Candida naturally exists is also naturally acidic. It is this acidity that prevents the overgrowth of Candida and keeps the Candida in its benign yeast form. And how alkalinity converts the Candida in to its pathogenic fungal form. For example, when someone takes antibiotics this kills of a lot of our beneficial acid forming bacteria that keep us healthy. When their numbers are reduced the pH of the terrain becomes too alkaline causing the Candida to overgrow in its pathogenic fungal form.

          But when referring to the mythical alkaline diet the reference to alkalizing is in reference to blood, not the whole body. Instead of people having to specify blood pH over and over and over they simply make reference to alkalizing, which people who are familiar with the subject are aware refers to the blood.

          It is like how we have pointed out over and over that neither urinary nor salivary pH reflect blood pH. So the saliva, the urine as well as various other parts of the body such as the lymphatic system, the stomach, the various parts of the intestine, the skin, etc. all have their own pH levels that are totally independent of the blood pH. You can imagine how tiring it would be to specify all the various pH levels constantly so the people talking about the “body’s pH” in reference to acid-alkaline balance have come to learn that the blood pH is what is being referenced unless otherwise specified since that is the most important pH and the one people are talking about when mentioning the narrow range that allows the body to survive. Colon pH, stomach pH, skin pH, etc. do not have that narrow pH range that will kill us if it goes out of those parameters.

          Yes, there are some peer reviewed journals that will discuss things like the benefits of using sodium bicarbonate, which is not a food and thus not what would really be considered part of a diet, for certain conditions like acidosis. Although, if you dig a little more you will also find that bicarbonate therapy is being limited more and more since it can also induce acidosis.

          Another issue is how people interpret these studies. I have seen a lot of people present studies in an attempt to back their beliefs that they misinterpreted often because they really did not understand what the studies were stating. For example, how many times have people posted the study about sodium bicarbonate ingestion and cancer claiming the study proves this kills cancer cells? The study claims no such thing. The study found that the bicarbonate was inhibiting metastases, which IS NOT the same thing as killing cancer cells.

          I have also seen people post flawed studies or reports on them. As an example look at the posts for October 20, 2014 regarding the claim that calcium causes cancer.

          Another problem is that sometimes people will see a key word such as acid or alkaline and they assume this means the study backs their view. For example, the person who posted a study claiming an acidic diet led to calcium loss from bones. The study said something about acidic diet or something like that in the title so they thought this proved their view. But the study never proved anything in large part because the study was poorly designed and heavily flawed. To make matters worse the study was grossly misinterpreted. First of all they never radioactively labeled the calcium, which prevented them from knowing what the source of excreted calcium really was. In addition, they failed to take in to account the well known fact that acids increase calcium absorption. This is why pre-acidified calcium sources such as calcium malate or citrate are better absorbed than calcium carbonate (oyster shell, coral, dolomite). Then they also overlooked the simple and well known fact that excess calcium is toxic to the body. Therefore, the body works to eliminate excess calcium to protect the body. Now using a little common sense what happens when we ingest calcium more efficiently? We get higher serum calcium levels. So what happens when we get higher serum calcium levels from increased absorption from acidic foods being taken with the calcium? This eliminates more of the absorbed calcium. This DOES NOT mean the acids in the foods were causing bone loss as the poster claimed.

          Bottom line is that if you think the studies are backing your belief about alkaline diets make sure that the study actually backs what you believe. And keep in mind the other facts such as ALL foods eventually metabolize in to acids and that respiration and kidney function account for virtually all pH regulation in the body. Therefore, if people want to claim that foods can alkalize the body they need to come up with a really good explanation of how and some really solid evidence to back those claims.


          • Actually, baking soda (as many more WILL make your blood more alkaline (the organism will of course compensate it by expelling carbonate anions or stopping expelling hydrogen cations via kidneys – so the change of blood pH will be small; yet noticeable.
            The stomach acid comes trough proton pump – a mechanism in stomach cells that cause to pump hydrogen cations (and chloride anions will be moved inside as well, to neutralize electric charge). The hydrogen cations are then reacting with carbonate anions from baking soda, forming water and carbon dioxide (which is ‘burped’ out).
            So in other words – we have added sodium cations to our organism (that is bad for blood pressure by the way) taking place of hydrogen cations that were moved to stomach and then bound to carbonate ions, finally moving out via burping). it is absolutely impossible to get ‘hyperchloremic acidosis’ because WE DO NOT INGEST ANY CHLORINE COMPOUNDS. the chlorine anions in stomach were moved in from blood – and then are returning to the blood in nearly close cycle. Actually, we can lose some chlorine that wasn’t reabsorbed.

            Anyway, I agree that ‘alkalizing’ the blood by force will do more harm than good (high urine pH increases the chance of urinary tract infection for instance

            • Luke: ” it is absolutely impossible to get ‘hyperchloremic acidosis’ because WE DO NOT INGEST ANY CHLORINE COMPOUNDS.”

              Hyperchloremic acidosis results when there is a deficiency of bicarbonate to deal with chloride. NOT from ingesting chlorine compounds. Thus an excess of sodium chloride, which can be formed from the ingestion of sodium bicarbonate, which is neutralized by stomach acid (HCl), can lead to hyperchloremic acidosis.

              Here is an example of the various medical research articles on the subject of sodium chloride induced hyperchloremic acidosis:


              • Hello again

                “an excess of sodium chloride, which can be formed from the ingestion of sodium bicarbonate, which is neutralized by stomach acid (HCl), can lead to hyperchloremic acidosis.”

                With all due respect, your argument is totally flawed. The chlorine ions in stomach HCl have to come from *somewhere* – they are pumped into stomach from blood, thus DEPLETING chlorine concentration in organism. After that – the Cl ions are nearly completly reabsorbed in intensines, so the net effect is a very small depletion (because low amounts of chlorine ions aren’t reabsorbed).
                So, hydrogen cations were absorbed by bicarbonate anions, then resulting CO2 was ‘burped’ out, water was absorbed, To compensate it, the carbon dioxide in organism reacted with water and changed into bicarbonate, releasing hydrogen cations.
                The net effect – amount of bicarbonates in blood increased, amount of sodium increased, pH – slightly- increased.

                “Here is an example of the various medical research articles on the subject of sodium chloride induced hyperchloremic acidosis:


                .The article is about *saline* (consisting of 0,9% sodium CHLORIDE solution, not bicarbonate as in baking soda). Saline ingestion (or infusion) causes net increase of chlorine in organism, and it does NOT cause depletion of hydrogen ions like bicarbonate does…

                • I was not talking about the bicarbonate. When you ingest the sodium bicarbonate it reacts with the hydrochloric acid forming among other things sodium chloride, which is not bicarbonate.

                  And as I said the study I posted was an example, in other words ONE of the various studies that can be found on the topic of sodium chloride (not bicarbonate) induced hyperchloremic acidosis.

                • Hello again
                  Guess the thread depth is too big, can’t reply directly to you..

                  Let’s make a ‘graph’ of what will happen when we drink a baking soda solution

                  Digestive tract { }
                  Blood and other organism reserves [[[ ]]]

                  Water is always in organism (including digestive tract)in large quantities, so I won’t include it in the ‘graph’. Assume it is always in both places.

                  1. Stomach is empty, we have some anions and carbon dioxide in organism reserves:
                  { } [[[ H+ 5X Na 3X Cl- 3X HCO3- 2X CO2 /other cations+/ /other anions-/ ]]]

                  2. Something is eaten. Stomach fills with gastric juice via proton pump (forcibly injecting hydrogen cations in, some chloride is also secreted)
                  { } <== H+ Cl- HCO3- + H+

                  { H+ CL- } [[[H+ 5X Na 2X Cl- 4X HCO3- 1X CO2 /other cations+/ /other anions-/ ]]]

                  So, we have an acid in stomach, the organism have less carbon dioxide and more carbonate anions

                  5. Ok… Now we drink a baking soda solution

                  Na+ HCO3- ==> {H+ CL-}

                  …we have it in stomach now
                  { Na+ HCO3- H+ Cl- }

                  6. Since H+ concentration in stomach is very high, the carbonate ions react at once :

                  HCO3- + H+ –> CO2 + H2O

                  And we have sodium chloride and carbon dioxide in stomach)

                  { Na+ Cl- CO2 }

                  *burp* – there goes the carbon dioxide…

                  {Na+ Cl-} [[[H+ 5X Na 2X Cl- 4X HCO3- 1X CO2 /other cations+/ /other anions-/ ]]]

                  The saline solution goes to the duodenum. and small / large intensine Typically, pancreas release bicarbonates into duodenum to neutralize acidity, however, it does not have to, since stomach acid is already neutralized.

                  Now the sodium chloride is reabsorbed.

                  {} ==> Na+ Cl- ==> [[[H+ 5X Na 2X Cl- 4X HCO3- 1X CO2 /other cations+/ /other anions-/ ]]]

                  and the final result is:
                  {} [[[H+ 6X Na 3X Cl- 4X HCO3- 1X CO2 /other cations+/ /other anions-/ ]]]

                  The net result? Same as direct injection of sodium bicarbonate. We have one more HCO3+, one more Na+…
                  … and the same chloride amount. There is no excess sodium chloride. It is still 3X NaCl…

                • I am surprised that you did not see the blatant error in your response.

                  Making it short and sweet you claim the carbon dioxide formed BY THE NEUTRALIZATION of the baking soda is burped up, which is true. So if the bicarbonate is being converted in part in to carbon dioxide, which is being burped up, but not the sodium chloride then there would be an increase in sodium chloride and a decrease in bicarbonate.

                • Sigh…
                  Looks like my previous response was cut off. Maybe too long…

                  Ill be short then.

                  1. There are NO ‘sodium chloride’ or ‘sodium bicarbonate’ in blood. There are sodium, (and potassium and other) cations and chloride, bicarbonate (and other) anions.

                  2. We drink a sodium bicarbonate solution, adding sodium cation and bicarbonate anions .

                  3. The stomach takes chloride anions and hydrogen cations from blood

                  4. In stomach, hydrogen cations and bicarbonate anions are reacting, forming carbon dioxide (burped), and water. Sodium cations and chloride anions are not reacting.

                  5. Sodium cations and chloride anions are absorbed in intensines.

                  The net result:
                  – Sodium cations increased
                  – Bicarbonate anions increased (formed from CO2 in blood)
                  – pH nearly the same, *slightly* higher (due to biucarbonates increase in blood buffer)
                  – Chloride anions unchanged (secreted into stomach, then absorbed from intensine).

                  So there are additional sodium cations, but no additional chlorine anions. Works the same as sodium bicarbonate injected directly into bloodstream.

            • the first phrase should be – “as many more carbonates”. My apologies for posting too quickly…

            • Wow. I cannot believe this conversation has gone on this long. I mean you guys are trying to work through what takes doctors two semesters to learn. AT LEAST.

              You cannot alter your bodies PH except in deleterious ways. It will have effects that in essence shorten your lifespan over an extended (<5years) time.

              Gastric acid is a digestive fluid, formed in the stomach. It is composed of hydrochloric acid (HCl) (around 0.5%, or 5000 parts per million) as high as 0.1 M,[1] potassium chloride (KCl) and sodium chloride (NaCl). The acid plays a key role in digestion of proteins, by activating digestive enzymes, and making ingested proteins unravel so that digestive enzymes break down the long chains of amino acids. Gastric acid is produced by cells lining the stomach, which are coupled in feedback systems to increase acid production when needed. Other cells in the stomach produce bicarbonate, a base, to buffer the fluid, ensuring that it does not become too acidic. These cells also produce mucus, which forms a viscous physical barrier to prevent gastric acid from damaging the stomach. Cells in the beginning of the small intestine, or duodenum, further produce large amounts of bicarbonate to completely neutralize any gastric acid that passes further down into the digestive tract.

              The pH of gastric acid is 1.5 to 3.5. Remember PH is a log measurement. For example the ph of arterial blood is like almost 3 million times that of gastric acid but is about isotonic to most of our other body's fluids.

              To understand the acid/base regulation of the human body is not going to be done here, not by me, but I can tell you that it involves much more than what is being stated and I am incredibly in awe of the interest in assuming that quackery is worth investigating to some of you but to get answers you seemingly don't want you come here for laymen (even me) to engage in debate. Use the same effort that went into reading the hucksterism hawking Alkaline body bullcrap and find out how our wonderful human body comes pretuned and you should not leave it be. The intricate balance of the stomach lumen, the pancreas, signaling hormones, proton gradients, enzymes, the gall bladder and bile ducts and several more equilibria mechanisms work to maintain a blood ph that is tightly regulated The normal blood pH is tightly regulated between 7.35 and 7.45. Putting sodium bicarbonate or any of the other materials that the hucksters of the "Alkaline" body myth blather on about is dangerous, it upsets the microbial balance in the jejunum, duodenum, and the small and large intestines.

              We know now that there are about a seemingly infinite number of unrealized symbiosis interactions taking place between our body and the microbiome we support. Put it this way….You could be sitting alone and still be completely outnumbered for your body is home to trillions upon trillions of tiny passengers – bacteria. Your body is made up of around ten trillion cells, but you harbour a hundred trillion bacteria. For every gene in your genome, there are 100 bacterial ones. This is our microbiome, and it has a huge impact on your health, your ability to digest food and you want to put sodium bicarbonate on it? ………….well again, go look it up but I will tell you that there are microbes that support the activity of the parietal cells.

              Chris, I would have though you would have "chymed" in by now 🙂

              Chloride and hydrogen ions are secreted separately from the cytoplasm of parietal cells and mixed in the canaliculi. Gastric acid is then secreted into the lumen of the oxyntic gland and gradually reaches the main stomach lumen.

              • Sorry what you are saying is wrong. A broad spectrum penicillin will do much more damage to the flora which support the bodily functions than a tea spoon of baking soda ever could. Doctors give away penicillin like there is no tomorrow. The notion that baking soda will damage the body is absurd. You are all quoting correlative research and not 100% causation.

      • Alkaline diet doesn’t exist them eh according to your comment above? You’ve proved yourself false because in Part 1 you describe what an alkaline diet is! Are KFC and McDonald’s paying you to write that the natural diet is a fraud and acid processed foods are the way to go?! What is the motivation to disprove this diet when it is a health diet. The world is drowning in obesity and heart disease and you are writing articles about how veggies can harm people… what a Quack.

      • Hi James, is it something to worry about if I add 1/2 to 1 tsp of baking soda to dough for pancake or biscuit ?

    • Sodium Bicarbonate Bashing Continues Unabated
      This video, by so called medical and health experts, does a great disservice to humanity though sodium bicarbonate bashing is nothing new. Max Gerson’s daughter has done it and so do mainstream cancer organizations because to them it’s an abomination to think that something so simple, safe and inexpensive could possibly treat cancer.
      The medical expert James Sloan said we need C02/carbonic acid to maintain the blood vessels in an open state. That’s correct and that is maintained by SLOW breathing not just any kind of breathing. The slower you breathe the more CO2 is retained so more O2 gets to the cells because, for one reason, the blood vessels are open. That is exactly what happens when you take sodium bicarbonate. It increases CO2/carbonates in the blood.
      What this video misses completely is when you take sodium bicarbonate orally it turns to CO2 in the stomach which actually stimulates stomach acid secretion and this process drives the bicarbonates into the blood.
      Yes many people are deficient in stomach acid but the video forgets to mention bicarbonate deficiencies, which increase as we age and the more we live in polluted urban centers. Bicarbonate deficiencies are addressed with sodium bicarbonate as well as potassium bicarbonate, calcium bicarbonate an


      • Atif,

        The discrediting of baking soda as a cancer therapy has nothing to do with it being cheap. I can name numerous herbs that are dirt cheap that actually work for cancer. The discrediting of baking soda as a cancer treatment has to do with the facts that it DOES NOT work and it is dangerous. Neutralizing stomach acid with baking soda can actually lead to cancer formation, nutritional deficiencies, immune suppression, etc. Why don’t we ever hear the proponents of baking soda “therapy” discussing these dangers? Are they trying to hide these facts or have they just never really researched the chemistry of baking soda and its adverse effects on the human body?

        Your claim about the bicarbonate increasing oxygenation is misleading. The bicarbonate is neutralized by the stomach acid forming among other things carbonic acid. Nearly all this gets released and burped up as carbon dioxide gas. Even if some of the carbon dioxide reaches the bloodstream the excess carbon dioxide would be either utilized by the body or rapidly exhaled to maintain the proper pH of the blood. Look up my response to Sircus on the video. You are repeating a lot of his claims, which I already addressed and debunked. For example, the bogus claim that the CO2 produced by the ingestion of baking soda drives bicarbonate in to the blood. That was one of the bogus claims made by Sircus that I already addressed in the comments section of the video.

        And bicarbonate levels do not decrease with age or pollution in urban centers. That is another myth.


  11. Hi James,

    Firstly, I appreciate your comments, especially as you are providing the information for free. Could you provide an opinion on Dr Sircus’s claims here, specifically the bicarbonate claims…

    “Sodium Bicarbonate Bashing Continues Unabated
    This video, by so called medical and health experts, does a great disservice to humanity though sodium bicarbonate bashing is nothing new. Max Gerson’s daughter has done it and so do mainstream cancer organizations because to them it’s an abomination to think that something so simple, safe and inexpensive could possibly treat cancer.
    The medical expert James Sloan said we need C02/carbonic acid to maintain the blood vessels in an open state. That’s correct and that is maintained by SLOW breathing not just any kind of breathing. The slower you breathe the more CO2 is retained so more O2 gets to the cells because, for one reason, the blood vessels are open. That is exactly what happens when you take sodium bicarbonate. It increases CO2/carbonates in the blood.
    What this video misses completely is when you take sodium bicarbonate orally it turns to CO2 in the stomach which actually stimulates stomach acid secretion and this process drives the bicarbonates into the blood.
    Yes many people are deficient in stomach acid but the video forgets to mention bicarbonate deficiencies, which increase as we age and the more we live in polluted urban centers. Bicarbonate deficiencies are addressed with sodium bicarbonate as well as potassium bicarbonate, calcium bicarbonate and now magnesium bicarbonate.
    Telling people that drinking alkaline water or sodium bicarbonate wipes out your stomach acid is misleading because the only time that happens is when you take bicarbonate with meals, which you are not supposed to do. Bicarbonate increases stomach acid production because the stomach reacts to the increased presence of bicarbonate/carbon dioxide.
    No one in their right mind, medically speaking, speaks out about sodium bicarbonate in a negative sense because there is easily a hundred years of clinical experience about its usefulness. Sodium bicarbonate medicine affords humanity with an inexpensive way to treat themselves of many problems including the flu. This video does humanity a great disservice.
    Yes high alkaline water is worthless if, and only if, it does not have much alkalinity! What gives alkaline water its alkalinity? Magnesium and bicarbonate!! Water from ionizers without minerals in the water is just an expensive way to get some extra electrons but this is no reason to put down a helpful form of medicine.”

    source https://www.facebook.com/drsircus/posts/630915240265691

    If you have already addressed this can you point me to the link. I also noticed one of your Sugar Balance Formula isn’t available on ebay anymore?

    • Jan,

      This IS NOT proof of calcium causing cancer or any other disease.

      First of all we really need to look at the actual study, not a news release on it.

      Secondly, high calcium levels seen in some cancer patients is not proof of calcium causing cancer. That is like saying 100% of cancer patients have oxygen in their blood and therefore this is proof that oxygen is the cause of cancer.

      There are various things that could account for a high calcium level in a cancer patient. For example, low vitamin D has been linked to both cancer formation and hyperparathyroidism. Hyperparathyroidism results in high serum calcium levels due to excess parathyroid hormone release. So there can be a correlation without being a cause. Yet another possibility is that the cancer is leading to bone destruction before reaching detectable levels or having been diagnosed.

      Before claiming high serum calcium causes cancer or any other disease there needs to be proof presented of causation, not just general association.

  12. I only have two questions, then I am going back to my work…

    @ James, You very conveniently skirted the issue I raised about providing actual PROOF that ANY of the world’s tea or coffee consuming countries show “abnormal” or “higher than normal” (whatever that is) incidence of adrenal dysfunction, than non-caffeine consuming countries… not that even then, this would actually prove your hypothesis…
    And, as an aside, why do you bother spreading yourself around the internet, wasting time that would be better spent finishing these mythical books you have been talking about forever… I, for one, would actually like to READ them…

  13. James:
    It is all about credibility….that is why I asked about your clinical background…..to me everything is theory until it has been proven to be effective 100% of the time. As long as treatment helps some and kills others it can not be seen as science based proof of efficacy.
    Anyway, thank you for interacting with me in this forum.
    It seems that it is ok to share your personal preferences when it comes to your choices of tea…which to me is more personal than answering my question about your clinical status. To me people who have no clinical experience with real people are just individuals who spent most of their time accumulating knowledge without translating that knowledge into a practical outcome….knowledge becomes alive when we apply it to life in a practical way….this way we actually help transform people’s life. Thank you James.

    • Sunflower: “It is all about credibility….that is why I asked about your clinical background…..”

      If it is all about credibility then back your claims with some REAL evidence and stop attacking the messenger.

      Someone’s background DOES NOT change the REAL science. I can think of quite a few doctors and clinician off hand that don’t have the faintest clue what they are talking about. This is why we need to rely on science, including the facts proven about human physiology instead of just guessing at things. Otherwise there is NO credibility.

      Sunflower: “to me everything is theory until it has been proven to be effective 100% of the time.”

      Wrong again. A theory is a hypothesis (educated guess) until it has evidence to prove it. Then it becomes a theory. Therefore, hypotheses are not evidence of anything.

      Sunflower: “It seems that it is ok to share your personal preferences when it comes to your choices of tea…which to me is more personal than answering my question about your clinical status.”

      Not at all. There is a MAJOR difference and one makes a person a target and the other does not. There is a reason people need to be very careful about putting out certain personal information on the internet. But some people do not understand such simple concepts and have to learn their lessons the hard way.

      Regardless, as I have pointed out so many times I AM NOT THE TOPIC OF THE BLOG ARTICLE. So stop trying to make this a personal issue. If you think you know what you are talking about then debate the topic, not the person!!!

      Here is one thing I will say about myself. It has been my personal experience that when people have no clue what they are talking about they keep resorting to trying to debate the person. They have to do this because since they have no real credible information to back their claims they of course cannot debate the actual topic of discussion. So all they have left to fight with is to try to debate the person in an attempt to attack the person’s credibility, especially by implying a lack of actual experience. They have to imply such things because they know less about the person they are trying to attack than they do the actual topic they really should be debating.

      • James….I am a long way from attacking you and please stop being so defensive…you have no need to defend anything…all I asked was if you have an experiential clinical background….if you say yes or no, how does that compromise your privacy. Man, all I am determined to do is find answers to relevant questions…and if they come from you or anyone else I make it my business to ascertain how much credibility a person and their info has. This is totally not personal….it seems a sensitive spot though for you considering other posts over the years. I am reading your posts with interest and find some of it very informative and valuable …and some I don’t agree with b/c my clinical experience has taught me differently. I absolutely don’t give a hack about some study done by some well educated science people when they again and again proof to be wrong. When I get results from a particular treatment and it does not confirm conventional studies would I then back of from applying it b/c it does not sit right with science, There are a lot of people in the science community who have been educated beyond their intelligence. Real healing occurs within a therapeutic relationship not in a science lab.

        • Sunflower: “James….I am a long way from attacking you and please stop being so defensive”

          This is such a simple concept that I am extremely surprised I actually have to explain it.

          What is the topic of this blog? Is it me? NO!!!! So instead of addressing the topic you try to attack my “credibility” (your word) by continually trying to make the topic of discussion about me and my background. People ONLY do this when they cannot debate a topic they really do not understand. Since they cannot debate the topic they instead try attacking the messenger making it about them and trying to attack their credibility.

          It does not matter what what a person’s background is. I have seen doctors with training more than yours that know squat about medicine.

          Furthermore, regardless of what a person’s background is this does not change the REAL sciences of chemistry or human physiology.

          And just because I refuse to tell you my background because it has NOTHING to do with the topic this DOES NOT mean I don’t have experience. It just means I am not dumb enough to post that information publicly.

          Now, if you want to debate the actual TOPIC go for it. But stop trying to attack my credibility because I can guarantee I know a whole lot more about medicine than you could ever hope to learn in your lifetime!!!! And again, I AM NOT the topic of this blog article. If people cannot figure out such a simple concept even when being told over and over should anyone think they would understand a more complex subject like medicine?

          Sunflower: “all I am determined to do is find answers to relevant questions…and if they come from you or anyone else I make it my business to ascertain how much credibility a person and their info has”

          This can be done by researching the claims. You cannot accomplish this by trying to attack someone’s credibility. That only proves personal doubt about one’s credibility.

          I tell people all the time to research all health claims they see on the internet from credible sources. Even the claims I make because I am confident in what I state. So I don’t feel the need to challenge other people’s credibility because what I state has been backed with real science and actual human experience.

          Sunflower: “This is totally not personal…”

          If it “totally not personal” then why do you keep trying to make the topic about me over and over despite my protests about you doing that instead of debating the topic of this blog? You may be able to fool yourself, but you are not fooling me.

          So once again, I am asking you to stay ON TOPIC, which IS NOT me!!!

          Sunflower: “I absolutely don’t give a hack about some study done by some well educated science people when they again and again proof to be wrong.”

          If you think these are wrong then present them for debate and back your debate with REAL evidence instead of making this personal.

          Sunflower: “There are a lot of people in the science community who have been educated beyond their intelligence.”

          I have always thought that this phrase was one of the dumbest I have ever heard. And unfortunately every time I have heard it this phrase was being used by people who knew nothing about real medicine so it was simply another way for these people to attack the people that actually do know about real medicine.

  14. James wrote:
    “Studies have shown over and over that if cancer cells become internally acidic they will die. Cancer cells require an internally alkaline pH more alkaline than healthy cells to survive and thrive. This is why cancer cells export acidic hydrogen ions in to the external matrix to maintain their highly alkaline internal pH. If the ability of hydrogen ion export is blocked the cancer cells become acidic and die.”

    Export of acidic hydrogen (proton) take place to external matrix when that matrix has alkaline reaction (negatively charged). Keeping external matrix positively charged (acidic) doesn’t allow cancer’s cell to export hydrogen proton and the cancer cell dies.
    Habitants in longevity oases don’t know what is cancer or other diseases due to their acidic blood pH level.

    • Jan: “Export of acidic hydrogen (proton) take place to external matrix when that matrix has alkaline reaction (negatively charged). Keeping external matrix positively charged (acidic) doesn’t allow cancer’s cell to export hydrogen proton and the cancer cell dies.”

      None of this makes sense. The external matrix is made acidic by the export of the hydrogen ions (protons). But the immediate area around the matrix remains acidic due to the constant export of protons. This DOES NOT kill the cancer cells. Cancer cells are killed though if the proton pumps of the cancer cells are blocked. This shifts the pH of the cancer cell from the alkaline side they need to survive and thrive to an acidic pH that kills them.

      This has NOTHING to do with the external charge. By the way, alkaline minerals have a positive charge. For example, sodium (Na+), potassium (K+), and calcium (Ca+). The opposite are the negatively charged ions such as acidic chloride (Cl-).

      Jan: “Habitants in longevity oases don’t know what is cancer or other diseases due to their acidic blood pH level.”

      Again, blood RARELY ever goes acidic.