Nederlands

Book Review

The Biology of Belief:

Unleashing the power of
consciousness, matter and
miracles
Bruce H. Lipton; Santa Rosa, CA,
Mountain of Love/Elite Books, 2005;
224 pages.
The central dogma of modern orthodox biology is that life is controlled by
genes. In The Biology of Belief, cell biologist Bruce Lipton explains how the
latest research has shown genetic determinism to be fundamentally flawed,
and presents a very readable account of the new biology. He says that
research into the way cells receive and process information shows that a
cells life is controlled not by its genes but by the physical and energetic
environment, which, in the case of humans, includes our thoughts. He
writes: The belief that we are frail biochemical machines controlled by
genes is giving way to an understanding that we are powerful creators of
our lives and the world in which we live (p. 17). The new biology is an
advance on the old one but, as we will see, it still has severe limitations.
Genetic delusions
Since the cracking of the genetic code by James Watson and Francis
Crick in 1953, DNA has assumed an all-powerful status. At first it was
thought to be responsible only for our physical characteristics, but then
scientists started claiming that our genes control our emotions and
behaviour as well. Lipton says that genes are simply molecular blueprints
used in the construction of cells, tissues, and organs. But even this goes

too far: genes are blueprints for the production of proteins how proteins
assemble themselves into cells, tissues, and organs is not understood.
Prior to the Human Genome Project, scientists held that one gene was
needed to provide the blueprint for each of the over 100,000 different
proteins that make up our bodies. Since there are also over 20,000
regulatory genes, the human genome was expected to contain a minimum
of 120,000 genes located in the 23 pairs of chromosomes. However,
geneticists were shocked to discover that the human genome consists of
only about 25,000 genes. More than 80% of the DNA that was thought to
be required does not exist! The one-gene, one-protein concept, which was
a fundamental tenet of genetic determinism, has therefore had to be
consigned to the scrap heap.
There is not much difference in the total number of genes found in
humans and in primitive organisms. The microscopic nematode roundworm
known as Caenorhabditis elegans has a body consisting of 969 cells and a
simple brain of about 302 cells, yet its genome consists of as many as
24,000 genes. This means that the human body, comprising over 50 trillion
cells, contains only 1000 more genes than this lowly worm. The fruit fly has
15,000 genes 9000 fewer than the more primitive Caenorhabditis worm.
Humans have roughly the same number of genes as mice! As geneticist
and Nobel Prize winner David Baltimore has said, it is clear that we do not
gain our undoubted complexity over worms and plants by using more
genes. Understanding what does give us our complexity ... remains a
challenge for the future (p. 64).
Darwinism and epigenetics
Lipton argues that genes cannot control life because they cannot turn
themselves on or off. That is done by signals from the cellular environment.
Epigenetics, the study of the molecular mechanisms by which the
environment controls gene activity, is today one of the most active areas of
scientific research. Environmental influences, including nutrition, stress,
and emotions, can modify genes, without changing their basic blueprint,
and these modifications can be passed on to future generations. DNA
makes up only half the content of chromosomes; the other half consists of
regulatory proteins, which are turning out to play as crucial a role in
heredity as DNA. Studies of protein synthesis reveal that epigenetic factors
can create 2000 or more variations of proteins from the same gene
blueprint.
Biologists central dogma (first formulated by Francis Crick) posits the
primacy of DNA, involving a one-way flow of information from DNA to RNA
to proteins. Lipton, on the other hand, argues for the primacy of the

environment. Regulatory genes direct the activity of protein-encoding

genes, but environmental signals control how regulatory proteins bind to
DNA. The flow of information is therefore: environmental signal regulatory
protein DNA RNA protein. Information can also flow in the reverse
direction, but subject to tight restrictions: RNA can rewrite DNA, protein
antibodies can change DNA, and changes in DNA influence the binding of
regulatory proteins.
Evidence for the role of epigenetic mechanisms has become so
compelling that some scientists have started speaking favourably again of
Jean-Baptiste de Lamarck (1744-1829), the much-scorned evolutionist who
believed that traits acquired as result of environmental influence could
sometimes be passed on to offspring. The genome is certainly turning out
to be far more fluid and responsive to the environment than previously
supposed. It is clear that DNA does not control biology, and that information
can be transmitted to descendants in ways other than through the base
sequence of DNA.
Whereas traditional darwinism sees evolution as essentially random,
purposeless, and violently competitive, Lamarck suggested that evolution
was based on cooperative interaction among organisms and their
environment. In Darwins Blind Spot (2002), Frank Ryan chronicles a
number of striking examples of cooperation among organisms. For
instance, there is a yellow shrimp that gathers food while its partner gobi
fish protects it from predators. There is also a species of hermit crab that
carries a pink anemone on top of its shell. Fish and octopuses like to feed
on hermit crabs, but when they approach this species, the anemone shoots
out its brilliantly coloured tentacles, with their microscopic batteries of
poisoned darts, and stings the potential predator. In return, the anemone
eats the crabs leftover food.
We now know that genes are transferred between members of the same
species and of different species. This highlights the dangers of genetic
engineering. Tinkering with the genes of a tomato, for example, could alter
the entire biosphere in unforeseen ways. One study has shown that when
humans digest genetically modified foods, the artificially created genes
transfer into and alter the beneficial bacteria in the intestine. Similarly, gene
transfer among genetically engineered agricultural crops and surrounding
native species has given rise to highly resistant superweeds. As Lipton
says, scientists are messing around with our genes and environment
without understanding how interconnected everything is.
Cells, brains, membranes

Although cells appear to be anatomically simple, they display incredible

complexity and power, and employ technologies that scientists have barely
begun to understand. Like humans, single cells analyze thousands of
stimuli from the microenvironment they inhabit, and select appropriate
behavioural responses to ensure their survival. They are even capable of
altering their own genes.
Lipton rejects the orthodox idea that the nucleus is the cells brain. If their
nuclei and genes are removed, cells can survive for up to two months or
more. They continue to exhibit complex, coordinated, life-sustaining
behaviours, but eventually die not because they have lost their brain but
because they have lost their reproductive capabilities and are unable to
replace failed proteins or replicate themselves. In other words, the nucleus
is the cells gonad. Lipton comments:
Confusing the gonad with the brain is an understandable error because
science has always been and still is a patriarchal endeavor. Males have
often been accused of thinking with their gonads, so its not entirely
surprising that science has inadvertently confused the nucleus with the
cells brain! (p. 66)
Lipton proposes that the true brain controlling cellular life is the
membrane the magical mem-brain, as he calls it. The membrane is a
semi-permeable, three-layered skin, only seven millionths of a millimetre
thick, which holds the contents of a cell together. But behind its apparent
simplicity lies great functional complexity. For instance, prokaryotes, which
include bacteria and other microbes, consist of a cell membrane enveloping
a droplet of cytoplasm, yet they display intelligence. They can sense the
presence of food and propel themselves towards it, and they can recognize
toxins and predators and take evasive action.
Instead of the cells operations being controlled by DNA blueprints stored
in the nucleus, as conventional biology would have us believe, Lipton
proposes that this is done by integral membrane proteins (IMPs) which
include receptor (awareness) and effector (action) proteins. The
membranes effector proteins, operating in response to molecular and
radiant-energy signals which its receptors pick up from the environment,
control the reading of genes so that worn-out proteins can be replaced or
new proteins created.
The cells operations are therefore primarily moulded by its interaction
with the environment, not by its genetic code. Genes cannot preprogram a
cell or an organisms life, because cell survival depends on the ability to
dynamically adjust to an ever-changing environment. In Liptons view, the
membranes function of interacting intelligently with the environment to

produce behaviour makes it the true brain of the cell; if the membrane is
destroyed, the cell dies. In multicellular organisms key functions of the
membrane are taken over by specialized tissues and organs nervous
system, lungs, muscles, etc.
Drugs and health
Millions of people attribute failing health not to a combination of mental,
physical, and emotional causes, but simply to the inadequacies of their
bodys biochemical mechanics. Increasingly, the first choice in dealing with
unruly children, for example, is to medicate them to correct their chemical
imbalances, rather than grappling with what is truly going on in their bodies
and minds.
Although scientists have linked lots of genes to lots of different diseases
and traits, they have rarely found that one gene causes a particular disease
or trait. Lipton points out that the diseases that are todays scourges
diabetes, heart disease, and cancer are not the result of a single gene,
but of complex interactions among multiple genes and environmental
factors. Only 5% of cancer and cardiovascular patients can attribute their
disease to heredity.
He argues that drugs and surgery are powerful tools when not overused,
but the notion of simple drug fixes is fundamentally flawed. Every time a
drug is introduced into the body to correct function A, it inevitably throws off
function B, C, or D. That is why pharmaceutical drugs come with
information sheets listing numerous side effects, ranging from irritating to
deadly. People who take over-the-counter antihistamines, for example, may
experience allergy relief but also the side effect of feeling drowsy. Synthetic
hormone replacement therapy has been shown to have disturbing side
effects that result in cardiovascular disease and neural dysfunctions such
as strokes.
According to a recent study, iatrogenic illness illness resulting from
medical treatment is the leading cause of death in the US, and adverse
reactions to prescription drugs are responsible for more than 300,000
deaths a year.
We have been programmed by pharmaceutical corporations to become a
nation of prescription drug-popping junkies with tragic results. ... Using
prescription drugs to silence a bodys symptoms enables us to ignore
personal involvement we may have with the onset of those symptoms. (pp.
109, 113)

Research suggests that our hyper-vigilant lifestyle has a severe impact on

the health of our bodies. Almost every major illness is linked to chronic
stress, and the inhibition of neuronal growth by stress hormones can lead
to depression.
Lipton argues that far more money should be spent on research into
alternative medicine, such as acupuncture, chiropractic, homeopathy, and
massage therapy, which are based on the belief that energy fields help to
control our physiology and health.
Mind over matter
The well-known placebo effect dramatically demonstrates the healing
power of the mind: fake drugs often prove just as effective as genuine
chemical cocktails, provided patients believe they are receiving the real
thing. The placebo effect has proved powerful in treating various diseases,
including asthma and Parkinsons disease. In a study of severely
depressed patients, 50% of those taking drugs improved but so did 32% of
those taking a placebo. In more than half the clinical trials for the six
leading antidepressants, the drugs did not outperform placebo sugar pills.
Interestingly, antidepressants have performed better and better in clinical
trials over the years, suggesting that slick marketing has produced a
placebo effect, demonstrating that beliefs are contagious! In a study of
patients with severe knee pain, those who received surgery improved, but
those in the placebo group (incisions were made in their knees and then
sewed up) improved just as much.
The opposite of the placebo effect is the nocebo effect. Negative thinking
including the hope-deflating messages that physicians sometimes convey
to their patients can damage health. For instance, a man suffering from
cancer of the esophagus a condition considered at the time to be 100%
fatal died a few weeks after his diagnosis, yet an autopsy found that there
was not enough cancer in his body to kill him. Our positive and negative
beliefs impact not only our health, but every aspect of our lives.
In 1952 Dr Albert Mason, a British physician, used hypnosis to
successfully treat a very severe case of warts, which covered most of a 15year-old boys body. Mason was later shocked to learn that the boy was not
in fact suffering from warts but from a lethal genetic disease called
congenital ichthyosis. This shows that the mind can even override genetic
programming. Mason tried to cure a number of other ichthyosis patients but
never with the same success. He attributed this to his own irrepressible
doubts about the ability of hypnosis to cure this genetic condition in
contrast to simple warts.

According to the germ theory, bacteria and viruses are the cause of
disease. This theory was developed in the 19th century and was initially
very controversial. One critic was so convinced it was wrong that he
brazenly gulped down a glass of water laced with vibrio cholerae, the
bacteria thought to cause cholera. Astonishingly, the mans belief was so
strong that he was completely unaffected by the virulent pathogen! Another
demonstration of mind over matter is fire walking: thousands of people
have managed to walk across hot coals, while those who waver in their
beliefs suffer burns. There are also many unexplained cases of terminal
cancer patients recovering their lives through spontaneous remissions.
Lipton says that thoughts
directly influence how the physical brain controls the bodys physiology.
Thought energy can activate or inhibit the cells function-producing
proteins ... The fact is that harnessing the power of your mind can
be more effective than the drugs you have been programmed to believe
you need. (p. 125)
He stresses that this requires not just positive thinking, but also eliminating
the habitually negative and self-sabotaging thought patterns of the
subconscious mind.
Energy and spirit
The new biology is still essentially a materialistic theory, which seeks to
explain everything in terms of physical matter-energy. Although Lipton
describes himself as having been transformed from an agnostic scientist
into a card-carrying mystic who believes that eternal life transcends the
body, his interpretation of spirit and immortality remains very limited.
His acceptance of the reality of many paranormal phenomena is a step
in the right direction:
Discovery after discovery about the mechanics of chemical signals ...
cannot explain paranormal phenomena. Spontaneous healings, psychic
phenomena, amazing feats of strength and endurance, the ability to walk
across hot coals without getting burned, acupunctures ability to diminish
pain by moving chi around the body, and many other paranormal
phenomena defy Newtonian biology. (p. 99)
He does not say whether he accepts the reality of materializations and
dematerializations of objects and entities, the projection and manifestation
of astral bodies, and similar psychic phenomena that pose a far greater
challenge to the materialistic paradigm.

The main problem is that he equates spirit and mind with energy, but
he seems to accept only conventional forms of energy, such as
electromagnetic energy (e.g. radio waves, microwaves, visible light, and
very low-frequency radiation) and acoustic energy. He claims that
electromagnetic radiation is sufficient to explain not only protein folding and
shape-shifting, and gene regulation, but also morphogenesis (the process
by which cells form themselves into organs and tissues). More radical
biologists such as Rupert Sheldrake, on the other hand, argue that
previously unrecognized causal factors like morphic fields are required
to explain such phenomena. The same applies to instincts and the
selfconscious mind.
Lipton, however, speaks of instinctive behaviours being passed on to
offspring in the form of genetic-based instincts yet there is no serious
evidence that DNA encodes habits. He regards the mind as immaterial
energy seated in the prefrontal cortex of the brain, and does not appear to
believe that it can exist independently of the body. He endorses the
conventional darwinian view that the evolution of higher mammals
somehow brought forth selfconsciousness, and declares that the receptoreffector protein complex is the fundamental unit of awareness/intelligence,
ignoring the possibility that mind works through physical forms and
structures from more ethereal levels of reality.
By contrast, according to the theosophic or ancient-wisdom tradition,
consciousness is not magically generated by matter but is the ultimate
ground of the universe; consciousness-life-substance is an eternal and
universal unitary essence, manifesting in infinite degrees of density and in
endlessly varied forms. The physical world is therefore the outer shell of
inner worlds, composed of subtler grades of energy-substance (astral,
mental, and spiritual), which are imperceptible to our normal senses but
just as material to the entities that inhabit them as our own world is to us.
Likewise, the physical body is animated and organized by inner bodies
such as an astral model-body, a reincarnating soul or mind, and a spiritualdivine self or monad. Strong support for this worldview is provided by a
broad body of scientific research in fields such as fundamental physics,
new energy, psychic and consciousness-related phenomena, and
memories of past lives. For adepts possessing the necessary occult
powers, subtler realms and bodies are visible and tangible realities.
Materialized mysticism
Lipton says: We are immortal, spiritual beings who exist separately from
our bodies (p. 184). Although this sounds very radical and progressive,
what he has in mind turns out to be far more mundane than the existence
of an immortal soul: We are mortal and following our demise, ... our

corporeal remains will be consumed and recycled back to the environment

(p. 201). This is nothing but the common materialistic interpretation of
immortality.
Lipton does, however, go one step further, saying that just as a televison
set picks up broadcasts transmitted through the air, so our self-identity is
generated by information present in the external environment, which is
downloaded by our cells receptors. He sees evidence that an individuals
broadcast, or self, is still present even after death in the fact that patients
who have received organ transplants sometimes report behavioural and
psychological changes. For instance, one conservative, health-conscious
American was astonished when she developed a taste for beer, chicken
nuggets, and motorcycles after her heart-lung transplant. Her donor turned
out to be a young motorcycle enthusiast who loved chicken nuggets and
beer. In another case, a young girl began having nightmares of murder
after her heart transplant, and her dreams were so vivid they led to the
capture of the murderer who killed her donor.
Lipton offers the following explanation:
the transplanted organs still bear the original identity receptors of the donor
and are apparently still downloading that same environmental information.
Even though the body of the person who donated the organs is dead, their
broadcast is still on. (p. 192)
But what is the nature of this environmental information? How does it
originate and where is it stored? Lipton seems to be saying that it takes the
form of electromagnetic radiation in our physical environment! He adds that
each of us downloads only a narrow band of the spectrum, which in its
totality constitutes God.
According to theosophy, every physical object or entity, from atom to
human to galaxy, has a more ethereal inner constitution in which memories
can inhere. This means that if an organ is transplanted into another person,
that person may under certain conditions tap into the memories associated
with it. Lipton, however, rejects the notion of cellular memory, since he
does not recognize the existence of astral bodies or of nonphysical forms of
energy-substance of any kind.
He suggests that cell and organ transplants offer a model not only for
immortality but also for reincarnation:
Consider the possibility that an embryo in the future displays the same set
of identity receptors that I now possess. That embryo will be tuned into my
self. My identity is back but playing through a different body. (p. 192)

He postulates the existence of some sort of environmental controller or

spirit, from which we receive information and to which we relay our
experiences, so that the way we live our lives influences our present
character or that of someone in the future who picks up the same
information. This interaction, he says, corresponds to the concept of
karma (p. 193)! Liptons narrow interpretation of reincarnation and karma is
a very feeble and distorted echo of the teachings to be found in genuine
mystical traditions, east and west.
Instead of an ill-defined spirit, which somehow generates and maybe
even consists of electromagnetic energy, and whose origin, locality, and
end are left hanging in the air by Lipton, theosophy posits a series of inner
bodies or souls of nonphysical grades of energy-substance, the lower ones
eventually dissipating after death in the physical and astral realms, while
our higher aspects endure for far longer. All our thoughts, deeds, and
experiences are recorded in these various consciousness vehicles or souls,
just as all events leave an imprint in the inner realms, and karma refers to
natures fundamental tendency to restore equilibrium by following every
action with an appropriate reaction, directed at whoever was responsible
for the original action. In other words, we reap what we sow.
Liptons truncated, earth-bound brand of mysticism rules out the
progressive evolution of the same essential individuality from life to life.
According to the wisdom tradition, on the other hand, reincarnating souls
return to earth again and again, enabling us to learn from our mistakes and
gradually unfold our higher potential. The new astral and physical bodies
that the soul works through in each life contain many of the same atoms
used in the past, which carry the record of its previous personalities. On
every level of our being, we are exactly what we have made ourselves;
what we inherit is our own past. That past is often something of a burden,
but we always have sufficient free will to begin to change ourselves for the
better.
Physical heredity is not simply a question of genetic determinism, with
our genetic makeup ultimately being a result of chance. Rather, it involves
a soul being attracted to parents who can provide the physical body and
environment best suited to its karmic needs. Moreover, physical DNA
merely contains the code for the proteins that form the building blocks of
our physical bodies. It does not govern the building of our bodies, nor does
it determine our basic habits and character traits these reflect processes
taking place in our inner astral and mental bodies.
Liptons attitude to evolution in general is similarly very limited. He
argues that there is more cooperation in nature than traditional darwinism
allows, that organisms respond intelligently to their environment, and that

the hereditary transmission of characteristics does not depend solely on

DNA. But random mutations, environmental pressures, and epigenetic
factors are not sufficient to explain the incredible diversity and complexity of
earths lifeforms, or how new types of fully functional organisms tend to
appear in the fossil record incredibly quickly. Nor do they explain the
emergence of selfconsciousness. Again, the wisdom tradition offers a much
broader vision, arguing that memories of the patterns and prototypes from
past evolutionary cycles guide and influence the present cycle, each
physical lifeform being a vehicle for an evolving consciousness-centre or
monad.
To sum up: Lipton exposes many deficiencies in orthodox biology and
evolutionary theory, and provides a good summary of cutting-edge
biological research. We are, as he says, spirits in material form and should
live in a way that supports everyone and everything on this planet.
However, although he believes the new biology bridges science and spirit,
the spiritual vision he offers is severely limited. He only accepts the
existence of recognized forms of physical matter-energy, and ignores
research pointing to the existence of more ethereal realms behind and
within the physical world.

by David Pratt. November 2005.

Worlds within worlds

Evolution and design
Rupert Sheldrake: a theosophical appraisal
Psychic powers
Where reincarnation and biology intersect
Consciousness and modern science
Genetic engineering: dream or nightmare?
Homepage