top of page
Search

Todays Medicine and the Power of Light

Part 3

History and Medical Effects of UBI

UV light and Blood

Over 100 years ago, Faroese-Danish physician/researcher Niels Finsen

found that ultraviolet light could effectively treat skin disorders. He was

awarded the 1903 Nobel Prize for Medicine because of his use of UV light

against lupus vulgaris which is tuberculosis of the skin.

Walter Ude, an MD from Minneapolis, reported a series of 100 cases of

Erysipelas (an acute streptococcus bacterial infection) in the 1920s, claiming

a nearly 100% cure rate with UV skin irradiation.

Emmett Knott pioneered the irradiation of autologous (from the

same body) blood treatment. His first try was with dogs before treating a

woman near death with post-abortion sepsis in 1933. She was thought to be

untreatable and left for dead but recovered wonderfully and went on to have

children.

By 1942, obstetrician Dr. Virgil K. Hancock and Knott had successfully

treated 6,520 patients using UBI without any harmful effects whatsoever.

Nearly every time it was used it cured infections and toxicity.

The most prolific American researcher was Dr. George Miley, a clinical

Professor at Hahnemann Hospital and College of Medicine. In 1942, he

reported success with 103 consecutive cases of acute pyogenic infections.

Results of recovery were 100% for early infections, 46 out of 47 for

moderately advanced and 17 out of 36 of those who were moribund (near

death).

In the mid 1940’s and early 50’s, Dr. E.W. Rebbeck used UBI for

patients experiencing septicemia (systemic infection) following childbirth

and abortion. While many of his patients were near death when they came

to him at Shadyside hospital in Pennsylvania, all responded in a positive

fashion and many recovered completely.


An extremely interesting article appeared in Time magazine on June 13, 1949. The article stated:

“Doctors have known for 15 years that irradiating the blood with invisible ultraviolet rays helps in some diseases, notably blood poisoning. The clinic decided to use the technique on children with acute rheumatic heart disease. Last week, they reported success in 22 consecutive cases. The three doctors concluded that “UBI” (ultraviolet blood irradiation) is safe and may prove, after further tests, to be the best treatment available.”

Ironically, today’s “mainstream medicine” still has no reliably effective treatment for viral conditions such as pneumonia, but will not accept UBI as a standard of care. One of the questions that you should be asking by this point is, “If the treatment works so well, why isn’t it commonly used?”


The Timeline of Decline of UBI

~1950’s ~

The age of antibiotics and vaccines had dawned and the enthusiasm was palpable. This all but spelled the end of an era for UBI therapy which would take a back seat despite the fact that for certain indications (e.g. hepatitis, viral pneumonia, and streptococcal toxemia) it was proven demonstrably superior. Unfortunately, research into this effective therapy came to a virtual halt. Just recently I had a conversation with an older doctor whose father had been one of the physicians who had used a UBI machine in his practice at the hospital. “When all those drugs came onto the scene,” she recounted, “They told my father to pack up his machine and get it out of there.” It may seem ridiculous, but that really does sum up the attitude towards UBI at that point in time.

~ 1955 - 1990’s ~

Only a few American physicians continued to work with UBI. Russia and Germany took the lead in light therapy producing scores of clinical studies which continued to demonstrate the efficacy and safety of this therapy.


1990’s - Present~

There are over 250 practitioners in the US, 3,000 in Europe and

thousands more throughout the world who use this treatment. Over

1 million UBI treatments have been successfully administered with

astounding results and minimal side effects to patients.

The honest truth about why it is not more fully accepted in mainstream

medicine today seems to stem from the fact that it just isn’t financially

lucrative. Whether we want to accept it or not, mainstream medicine is a

business and business in today’s society means that financial gain has a high

priority. I do realize I’m painting with broad brushstrokes, but generally

speaking, that is the culture we now seem to live in.

Other contributing factors include ignorance, skepticism and a general

intolerance for treatments that do not require surgery

or a drug.



3 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All

Comments


bottom of page