Partial document: Work of Dr.

Bruce Lipton

Le principe de “la conscience cellulaire”:

Durant ces recherches en genetique, Bruce Lipton publiat en 1977 un document

intitule “La conscience des cellules”. Dans cet article il decrit en detail le
comportement des cellules dans leurs propre environement. Durant ses experiences
conduitent en laboratoire, Bruce Lipton a decouvert que la notion courante consistant
au control des sytemes biologiques par les genes, etait non seulement erronee mais
completement fausse. De ces experiences il a develope une comprension des
mechanismes regulatoires des cellules et de leur reponse au stimulis exterieurs.

Croyances conventionnelles et fausses presomptions:

L’ une des fausse presomption les plus encree, est celle du “determinisme genetique”
dans laquelle, depuis le debut des annes 50, lorsqure les biologistes de l’ epoque
finalement dechiffres le code genetique, et developes la notion ou les genes control
la biologie. Pratiquement parlant, tous les genes sont contenu dans l’ organelle la
plus importante, le noyau (nucleus). Les opinons conventionnels considere le noyau
comme le “centre de commande” des cellules. Ce qui automatiquement engendre le
concept ou le noyau est l’ equivalent du “cerveau”. Ceci conduit au determinisme
genetique, et de la croyance en la fatalite ou la vie de tout organisme est ecrit dans
le code genetique, et donc “predetermine”. La science biologique actuelle endorse ce
concept de base, et par l’ intermediare notre reference pour toute question de sante
et de maladies. Cette croyance englobe la notion de la susceptibilite a certaine
maladies ou l’expression de certain comportements irrationels sont automatiquement
lies a la ligne genetique ou meme a l’ occasion sont associes a des mutations
spontannees. Par la meme occasion, cette croyance s’ etend a la perception par la
majorite des scientifiques, que l’ esprit et la conscience humaine est “encodee” dans
les molecules du systeme nerveux. Ceci promouvois la notion ou l’ emergence de la
conscience est un reflet du “fantome dans la machine” on en d’ autre termes que l’
esprit du conducteur est inclus dans le moteur de la voiture.

Fausse presomptions des genes et de l’ ADN:

La primaute actuelle de l’ infuence de l’ ADN comme element regulateur de

l‘evolution et du comportement biologique est base sur des presomption infondees.
Dans un article original publie en 1990, intitule BioEssays (1990, 12 (9):441-446) H.
F. Nijhout decris comment les concepts concernant “les controls et programes”
genetiques ont ete initialement concus comme methaphores de facon a diriger et a
focaliser la direction de la recherche genetique. Une repetition a grande echelle des
hypotheses contenues dans ce document durand les 50 dernieres annees ont aboutis
en transformant les “methaphores de ce modele” en “mechnisme realistique”
malgres l’ absence d’ evidences ou de preuves. Comme cette presomption accentue
le programe genetique et le place en premier echelon dans l’ echelle genetique, les
genes ont ainsi acquis par ce subterfuge le status d’ agent causal, controlant tout
comportement biologique (ex: genes favorisant le cancer, alcholisme, et meme le
comportemetn criminel).
En verite, des cinquante milliard (environ) de cullules du corp humain, toutes les
fonctions physiologiques de notre corp existent deja au niveau d’ une seule cellule
eukayotic (cellule nucleonique). Tout organisme composes d’ une seule cellule telle
que un amibe ou un paramecium, possede l’ equvalent cytologique d’ un system
digestif, d’ un systeme exectoire, respiratoire, muscloskeletal, un systeme
immunitaire, reproductif et un system cardiovasulaire parmis tant d’ autres. Chez les
humains, ces fonction sont associees avec l’ activite d’ organe multicellulaires. Les
procedures physiologiques des cellules sont structurees d’ un maniere semblable et
organisees en sous systemes appeles organelles.

La vie cellulaire est maintenue en controllant d’ une maniere precise les fonctions
physiologiques des systemes cellulaires. L’ expression d’ un repertpoire de
comportement predisible chez les cellules implique l’ existance d’ un system nerveux.
Ce systeme reagit aux stimulis de l’ environnement avec des reponses appropriees.
L’ organelle responsible de la coordinantion et l’ ajustement des reactions de la
cellule a son environrment interieur et exterieur, representerai l’ equivalent
cytoplasmique du “cerveau”.

Reality and results of experiments:

The notion that the nucleus and its genes are the "brain" of the cell is an untenable
and illogical hypothesis. If the brain is removed from an animal, disruption of
physiologic integration would immediately lead to the organism's death. If the
nucleus truly represented the brain of the cell, then removal of the nucleus would
result in the cessation of cell functions and immediate cell death. However,
experimentally enucleated cells may survive for two or more months with out genes,
and yet are capable of effecting complex responses to environmental and
cytoplasmic stimuli (Lipton, et al., Differentiation 1991, 46:117-133). Logic reveals
that the nucleus can not be the brain of the cell!

Studies on cloned human cells led Dr. Lipton to the awareness that the cell’s plasma
lemma, commonly referred to as the cell membrane, represents the "brain” of the
cell. Cell membranes, which are the first biological organelle to appear in evolution,
are the only organelle common to every living organism. Cell membranes
compartmentalize the cytoplasm, separating it from the uncertainties of the external
environment. It is a barrier which enables the membrane of the cell to maintain
tight "control" over the cytoplasmic environment, in order to allow the cell to carry
out biological reactions. Cell membranes are so thin that they can only be observed
using the electron microscope. Consequently, the existence and universal
expression of the membrane structure was only clearly established around 1950.

The cell membrane (plasma lemma):

In electron micrographs, the cell membrane appears as a minutely thin (<10nm), tri-
layered (black-white-black) "skin" enveloping the cell. The fundamental structural
simplicity of the cell membrane, which is identical for all biological organisms,
beguiled cell biologists. For most of the last fifty years, the membrane was
perceived as a "passive," semi-permeable barrier, resembling a breathable "plastic
wrap," whose function was to simply contain the cytoplasm.

The membrane’s layered appearance reflects the organization of its phospholipid

building blocks. These lollipop-shaped molecules are amphipathic, they possess both
a globular polar phosphate head (Figure A) and two stick-like non-polar legs (Figure
B). When shaken in solution, the phospholipids self-assemble into a stabilizing
crystalline bi layer (Figure C).

The lipid legs comprising the core of the

membrane provide a hydrophobic barrier
(Figure D) that partitions the cytoplasm from
the ever-changing external environment.
While cytoplasmic integrity is maintained by
the lipid’s passive barrier function, life
processes necessitate the active exchange of
metabolites and information between the
cytoplasm and surrounding environment. The
physiologic activities of the plasma lemma are
mediated by the membrane’s proteins .

Each of the approximately 100,000 different proteins providing for the human body
is comprised of a linear chain of linked amino acids. The "chains" are assembled from
a population of twenty different amino acids. Each protein’s unique structure and
function is defined by the specific sequence of amino acids comprising its chain.
Synthesized as a linear string, the amino acid chains subsequently fold into unique
three dimensional globules. The final conformation (shape) of the protein reflects a
balance of electrical charges among its constituent amino acids.

The three dimensional morphology of folded proteins endows their surfaces with
specifically shaped clefts and pockets. Molecules and ions possessing
complementary physical shapes and electrical charges will bind to a protein’s surface
clefts and pockets with the specificity of a lock-and-key. Binding of another molecule
alters the protein’s electrical charge distribution. In response, the protein’s amino
acid chain will spontaneously refold to rebalance the charge distribution. Refolding
changes the protein’s conformation. In shifting from one conformation to the next,
the protein expresses movement. Protein conformational movements are harnessed
by the cell to carry out physiologic functions. The work generated by protein
movement is responsible for "life."

Though a human is comprised of over fifty trillion cells, there are no physiologic
functions in our bodies that were not already pre-existing in the biology of the single,
nucleated (eukaryotic) cell. Single-celled organisms, such as the amoeba or
paramecium, possess the cytological equivalents of a digestive system, an excretory
system, a respiratory system, a musculoskeletal system, an immune system, a
reproductive system and a cardiovascular system, among others. In the humans,
these physiologic functions are associated with the activity of specific organs. These
same physiologic processes are carried out in cells by diminutive organ systems
called organelles.

Cellular life is sustained by tightly regulating the functions of the cell’s physiologic
systems. The expression of predictable behavioral repertoires implies the existence
of a cellular "nervous system." This system reacts to environmental stimuli by
eliciting appropriate behavioral responses. The organelle that coordinates the
adjustments and reactions of a cell to its internal and external environments would
represent the cytoplasmic equivalent of the "brain."

Since the breaking of the genetic code in the early 1950's, cell biologists have
favored the concept of genetic determinism, the notion that genes "control" biology.
Virtually all of the cell’s genes are contained within the cell’s largest organelle, the
nucleus. Conventional opinion considers the nucleus to be the "command center" of
the cell. As such, the nucleus would represent the cellular equivalent of the "brain."

Genetic determinism infers that the expression and fate of an organism are primarily
"predetermined" in its genetic code. The genetic basis of organismal expression is
ingrained in the biological sciences as a consensual truth, a belief by which we frame
our reference for health and disease. Hence the notion that susceptibility to certain
illnesses or the expression of aberrant behavior is generally linked to genetic lineage
and, on occasions, spontaneous mutations. By extension, it is also perceived by a
majority of scientists that the human mind and consciousness are "encoded" in the
molecules of the nervous system. This in turn promotes the concept that the
emergence of consciousness reflects the "ghost in the machine."

The primacy of DNA in influencing and regulating biological behavior and evolution is
based upon an unfounded assumption. A seminal article by H. F. Nijhout (BioEssays
1990, 12 (9):441-446) describes how concepts concerning genetic "controls" and
"programs" were originally conceived as metaphors to help define and direct avenues
of research. Widespread repetition of this compelling hypothesis over fifty years has
resulted in the "metaphor of the model" becoming the "truth of the mechanism," in
spite of the absence of sustentative supporting evidence. Since the assumption
emphasizes the genetic program as the "top rung" on the biological control ladder,
genes have acquired the status of causal agents in eliciting biological expression and
behavior (e.g., genes causing cancer, alcoholism, even criminality).

The notion that the nucleus and its genes are the "brain" of the cell is an untenable
and illogical hypothesis. If the brain is removed from an animal, disruption of
physiologic integration would immediately lead to the organism's death. If the
nucleus truly represented the brain of the cell, then removal of the nucleus would
result in the cessation of cell functions and immediate cell death. However,
experimentally enucleated cells may survive for two or more months with out genes,
and yet are capable of effecting complex responses to environmental and
cytoplasmic stimuli (Lipton, et al., Differentiation 1991, 46:117-133). Logic reveals
that the nucleus can not be the brain of the cell!

Studies on cloned human cells led me to the awareness that the cell’s plasma
lemma, commonly referred to as the cell membrane, represents the cell’s "brain."
Cell membranes, the first biological organelle to appear in evolution, are the only
organelle common to every living organism. Cell membranes compartmentalize the
cytoplasm, separating it from the vagaries of the external environment. In its
barrier capacity, the membrane enables the cell to maintain tight "control" over the
cytoplasmic environment, a necessity in carrying out biological reactions. Cell
membranes are so thin that they can only be observed using the electron
microscope. Consequently, the existence and universal expression of the
membrane structure was only clearly established around 1950.
A number of the twenty amino acids comprising the protein’s chain are non-polar
(hydrophobic, oil-loving). The hydrophobic portions of proteins seek stability by
inserting themselves into the membrane’s lipid core. The polar (water-loving)
portions of these proteins extend from either or both of the membrane’s water-
covered surfaces. Proteins incorporated within the membrane are called integral
membrane proteins (IMPs).

Membrane IMPs can be functionally subdivided into two classes: receptors and
effectors. Receptors are input devices that respond to environmental signals.
Effectors are output devices that activate cellular processes. A family of processor
proteins, located in the cytoplasm beneath the membrane, serve to link signal-
receiving receptors with action-producing effectors.

Receptors are molecular "antennas" that recognize environmental signals. Some

receptor antennas extend inward from the membrane’s cytoplasmic face. These
receptors "read" the internal milieu and provide awareness of cytoplasmic conditions.
Other receptors extending from the cell’s outer surface provide awareness of
external environmental signals.

Conventional biomedical sciences hold that environmental "information" can only be

carried by the substance of molecules (Science 1999, 284:79-109). According to this
notion, receptors only recognize "signals" that physically complement their surface
features. This materialistic belief is maintained even though it has been amply
demonstrated that protein receptors respond to the vibrations of frequencies.
Through a process known as electro conformational coupling (Tsong, Trends in
Biochem. Sci. 1989, 14:89-92), the vibration of the resonant energy fields can alter
the balance of charges in a protein. In a harmonic energy field, receptors will
change their conformation. Consequently, membrane receptors respond to both
physical and energetic environmental information.

A receptor’s "activated" conformation informs the cell of a signal’s existence.

Changes in receptor conformation provide for cellular "awareness." In its "activated"
conformation, a signal-receiving receptor may bind to either a specific function-
producing effector protein or to intermediary processor protein. Receptor proteins
return to their original "inactive" conformation and detach from other proteins when
the signal ceases.

The family of effector proteins represent "output" devices. There are three different
types of effectors, transport proteins, enzymes and cytoskeletal proteins.
Transporters, which include the extensive family of channels, serve to transport
molecules and information from one side of the membrane barrier to the other.
Enzymes are responsible for metabolic synthesis and degradation. Cytoskeletal
proteins regulate the shape and motility of cells.

Effector proteins generally possess two conformations: an active configuration in

which the protein expresses its function; and a "resting" conformation in which the
protein is inactive. For example, a channel protein in its active conformation
possesses an open pore through which specific ions or molecules traverse the
membrane barrier. In returning to an inactive conformation, protein refolding
constricts the conducting channel and the flow of ions or molecules ceases.
Putting all the pieces together we are provide with insight as to how the cell’s "brain"
processes information and elicits behavior. The innumerable molecular and radiant
energy signals in a cell's environment creates a virtual cacophony of information. In
a manner resembling a biological Fourier transform, individual surface receptors (Fig.
H) sense the apparently chaotic environment and filter out specific frequencies as
behavioral signals. Receipt of a resonant signal (Fig. I, arrow) induces a
conformational change in the cytoplasmic portion of the receptor (Fig. I, arrowhead).
This conformational change enables the receptor to complex with a specific effector
IMP (Fig. J, in this case a channel IMP). Binding of the receptor protein (Fig. K) in
turn elicits a conformational change in the effector protein (Fig. L, channel opens).
Activated receptors can turn on enzyme pathways, induce structural reorganization
and motility or activate transport of uniquely pulsed electrical signals and ions across
the membrane.

Processor proteins serve as "multiplex" devices in that they can increase the
versatility of the signal system. Such proteins interface receptors with effector
proteins (P in figure M). By "programming" processor protein coupling, a variety of
inputs can be linked with a variety of outputs. Processor proteins provide for a large
behavioral repertoire using a limited number of IMPs.

Effector IMPs convert receptor-mediated environmental signals into biological

behavior. The output function of some effector proteins might represent the full
extent of an elicited behavior. However, in most cases, the output of effector IMPs
actually serve as a secondary "signal" which penetrates the cell and activates
behavior of other cytoplasmic protein pathways. Activated effector proteins also
serve as transcription factors, signals that elicit gene expression.

The behavior of the cell is controlled by the combined actions of coupled receptors
and effector IMPs. Receptors provide "awareness of the environment" and effector
proteins convert that awareness into "physical sensation." By strict definition, a
receptor-effector complex represents a fundamental unit of perception. Protein
perception units provide the foundation of biological consciousness. Perceptions
"control" cell behavior, though in truth, a cell is actually "controlled" by beliefs, since
perceptions may not necessarily be accurate.

The cell membrane is an organic information processor. It senses the environment

and converts that awareness into "information" that can influence the activity of
protein pathways and control the expression of the genes. A description of the
membrane’s structure and function reads as follows: (A) based upon the organization
of its phospholipid molecules, the membrane is a liquid crystal; B) the regulated
transport of information across the hydrophobic barrier by IMP effector proteins
renders the membrane a semiconductor; and (C) the membrane is endowed with
IMPs that function as gates (receptors) and channels. As a liquid crystal
semiconductor with gates and channels, the membrane is an information
processing transistor, an organic computer chip.

Each receptor-effector complex represents a biological BIT, a single unit of

perception. Though this hypothesis was first formally presented in 1986 (Lipton
1986, Planetary Assoc. for Clean Energy Newsletter 5:4), the concept has since been
technologically verified. Cornell and others (Nature 1997, 387:580-584), linked a
membrane to a gold foil substrate. By controlling the electrolytes between the
membrane and the foil, they were able to digitize the opening and closing of
receptor-activated channels. The cell and a chip are homologous structures.

The cell is a carbon-based "computer chip" that reads the environment. Its
"keyboard" is comprised of receptors. Environmental information is entered via its
protein "keys." The data is translated into biological behavior by effector proteins.
The IMP BITs serve as switches that regulate cell functions and gene expression.
The nucleus represents a "hard disk" with DNA-coded software. Recent advances in
molecular biology emphasize the read/write nature of this hard drive.

Interestingly, the thickness of the membrane (about 7.5 nanometer) is fixed by the
dimensions of the phospholipid bi layer. Since membrane IMPs are approximately 6-
8 nm in diameter, they can only form a mono layer in the membrane. IMP units can
not stack upon one another, the addition of more perception units is directly linked
to an increase in membrane surface area. By this understanding, evolution, the
expansion of awareness (i.e., the addition of more IMPs) would most effectively be
modeled using fractal geometry. The fractal nature of biology can be observed in the
structural and functional reiterations observed in the hierarchy of the cell, such as
multi cellular organisms (man) and the communities of multi cellular organisms
(human society).

This new perception on cell control mechanisms frees us from the limitations of
genetic determinism. Rather than behaving as programmed genetic automatons,
biological behavior is coupled dynamically to the environment.

This approach at the nano level, highlights the mechanism of operation of the
individual perception proteins. This understanding of the processing mechanism
emphasizes the holistic nature of biological organisms. The expression of the cell
reflects the recognition of all perceived environmental stimuli, both physical and
energetic. Consequently, the "Heart of Energy Medicine" may truly be found in the
magic of the membrane.

References and Notes

1. H. F. Nijhout, BioEssays, 12(9) (John Wiley and Sons, New York, NY,1990)
pp.441-446
2. B. H. Lipton, et al., Differentiation, 46(Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, FRG, 1991)
pp.117-133

3. N. Williams, Science, 277 (AAAS, Washington, DC 1997) pp476-477

4. T. Y. Tsong, Trends in Biochemical Sciences 14 (Elsevier, West Sussex, UK 1989)

pp. 89-92

5. B. H. Lipton, Planetary Association for Clean Energy Newsletter, 5 (Planetary

Association for Clean Energy, Hull, Quebec, 1986) pg. 4

6. B. A. Cornell, et al. Nature 387 (Nature Publishing Group, London, UK,1997) pp.
580-584