Bruce Lipton & the New Biology
Connecting the Dots
Bruce H. Lipton, PhD is an internationally recognized leader in bridging science and spirit. He is a stem cell biologist, bestselling author and recipient of the 2009 Goi Peace Award.
Dr. Lipton began his scientific career as a cell biologist. He received his Ph.D. Degree from the University of Virginia at Charlottesville before joining the Department of Anatomy at the University of Wisconsin’s School of Medicine in 1973. Dr. Lipton’s research on muscular dystrophy, studies employing cloned human stem cells, focused upon the molecular mechanisms controlling cell behavior. An experimental tissue transplantation technique developed by Dr. Lipton and colleague Dr. Ed Schultz and published in the journal Science was subsequently employed as a novel form of human genetic engineering.
In 1982, Dr. Lipton began examining the principles of quantum physics and how they might be integrated into his understanding of the cell’s information processing systems. He produced breakthrough studies on the cell membrane, which revealed that this outer layer of the cell was an organic homologue of a computer chip, the cell’s equivalent of a brain. His research at Stanford University’s School of Medicine, between 1987 and 1992, revealed that the environment, operating though the membrane, controlled the behavior and physiology of the cell, turning genes on and off. His discoveries, which ran counter to the established scientific view that life is controlled by the genes, presaged one of today’s most important fields of study, the science of epigenetics. Two major scientific publications derived from these studies defined the molecular pathways connecting the mind and body. Many subsequent papers by other researchers have since validated his concepts and ideas.
He is regarded as one of the leading voices of the new biology.
Bruce Lipton on the New Biology
When I first introduced the concepts I collectively referred to as the “new biology” in 1980, almost all of my scientific colleagues ignored these new ideas as unbelievable and some even went as far as calling it a scientific “heresy.” However, since that time, conventional biology has been undergoing a profound revision of its basic beliefs. The new revisions of biomedicine are leading traditional science toward the same conclusions I had twenty-five years ago. The funny part is that when I first presented public lectures on the “new biology” in 1985, my scientific peers walked out on my lectures considering the ideas as flights of fantasy. Today, when presenting the same information, research scientists are quick to respond, “So what is it that you are saying that is new?” Indeed, our biological beliefs are evolving.
While leading edge science has acquired a different view of how life works, the general public is still being educated with the outdated beliefs. Scientists know that genes don’t control life, yet most media (TV, radio, newspapers and magazines) are still informing the public that genes control their lives. People are still primarily attributing their deficiencies and illnesses to genetic dysfunctions. Since we are taught that genes “control” life, and as far as we know we did not select our genes nor can we change them, then we perceive we are powerless in controlling our biology and behaviors. The beliefs about genes cause the public to perceive of themselves as “victims” of heredity.
Yet today there are still some very significant differences between the views of conventional biology and the insights offered by the “new biology.” Firstly, traditional biologists still acknowledge that the nucleus (the cell organelle that contains the genes) “controls” biology, an idea that emphasizes genes as the “primary” controlling factor in life. In contrast the “new biology” concludes that the cell membrane (the “skin” of the cell) is the structure that primarily “controls” an organism’s behavior and genetics.
The membrane contains the molecular switches that regulate a cell’s functions in response to environmental signals. For example, a light switch can be used to turn a light on and off. Does the switch “control” the light? Not really, since the switch is actually “controlled’ by the person that turns it on and off. A membrane switch is analogous to a light switch in that it turns a cell function or the reading of a gene on and off…yet the membrane switch is actually activated by an environmental signal. So the “control” is not in the switch, it is in the environment. While conventional biologists are now recognizing that the environment is an important contributor in regulating biology, the “new biology” emphasizes the environment as the primary control in biology.
Secondly, conventional biomedical science emphasizes that the physical “mechanisms” that control biology are grounded in Newtonian mechanics. In contrast, the “new biology” acknowledges that the mechisms of the cell are controlled by quantum mechanics. This is a major difference in perspective for the following reason: Newtonian mechanics places emphasis on the material realm (atoms and molecules), while quantum mechanics focuses upon the role of the invisible energy forces that collectively form the “field” (see The Field by Lynne MacTaggart).
Medicine sees the body as strictly a mechanical device composed of physical biochemicals and genes. If the operation of the body is dis-eased, medicine uses physical drugs and chemistry to heal the body. In the quantum universe, it is recognized that invisible energy fields and physical molecules cooperate in creating life. In fact, quantum mechanics recognizes that the invisible moving forces of the field are the primary factors that shape matter. At the very leading edge of biophysics today, scientists are also recognizing that the body’s molecules are actually controlled by vibrational energy frequencies, so that light, sound and other electromagnetic energies profoundly influence all the functions of life. This new insight about the power of energy forces provides an understanding of how Asian energy medicine (e.g., acupuncture, feng shui), homeopathy, chiropractic and other complementary healing modalities influence health.
Among the “energy” forces that control biology are the electromagnetic fields that are generated by the mind. In conventional biology, the action of the mind is not really incorporated into the understanding of life. This is very surprising in that medicine acknowledges that the placebo effect is responsible for at least one third of all medical healing, including surgery. The placebo effect occurs when someone is healed due to their belief (action of the mind) that a drug or medical procedure is going to heal them, even though that drug can be a sugar pill or the procedure a sham. Interestingly, the influence of this very valuable healing ability is generally disregarded by conventional allopathic medicine and even “despised” by the drug companies that prefer to see drugs as the only remedy for disease.
The “new biology” emphasizes the role of the mind as the primary factor influencing health. This is an important difference because it acknowledges that we are not necessarily victims of the biology, and that with proper understanding we can use the mind as a power that controls life. In this reality, since we can control our thoughts, we become masters of our biology and not victims of hardwired genes.
Thirdly, the “new biology” emphasizes that evolution is not driven by the mechanisms emphasized in Darwinian biology. While the “new biology” still recognizes that life evolved over time, it suggests that it was more influence by Lamarckian mechanisms than Darwinian mechanisms. (This answer is discussed in more detail in the Darwinian question below.)
In conclusion, the intention of the “new biology” is not so much directed toward the scientific community (which has already begun revising its belief system) as it is intended for the public (lay audience) that is still being mis-educated with old, outdated and limiting beliefs. The public needs to be aware of the new science for it represents knowledge that will allow them to have more power over their lives.
This is new knowledge is about “self.” Since knowledge is power, than “knowledge of self” directly means self-empowerment, exactly what we need during these troubling times for the planet.
The New Biology versus Darwinism
Firstly, people confuse evolution with Darwinian theory. Jean-Baptiste de Lamarck scientifically established evolution in 1809, fifty years before Darwin’s theory. Darwinian theory is about “how” evolution occurred. Darwinian theory offers two basic steps: 1) Random Mutation- the belief that gene mutations are random and not influenced by the environment. Simply, evolution is driven by “accidents.” 2) Natural Selection- Nature eliminates the weakest organisms in a “struggle” for existence. Simply, life is based upon competition with winners and losers.
New scientific insights offer a different picture. In 1988, research established that when stressed, organisms have molecular adaptation mechanisms to select genes and modify their genetic code. Simply, organisms can change their genetics in response to environmental experiences. Consequently, there are now two types of genetic mutations: “random” and “adaptive.” In accepting “directed” mutations as an evolutionary mechanism, logic would select that process as highly probable in shaping the evolution and beautiful organization of the biosphere. While it could always be argued that life arose through “accidental” random mutations, it would be highly improbable that this mechanism would be the primary drive force behind evolution.
Conclusion: the order of life implies we are not likely accidents of random evolution, for we evolved from, and are totally connected to, everything on this planet. This new vision reveals that human influences in destroying the environment are actually leading to our own extinction. Humans were truly meant to be the gardeners in the Garden of Eden.
Darwinian theory further emphasizes that life is based upon a “survival of the fittest in the struggle for existence,” implying that it is a “dog-eat-dog” world where we must struggle to stay alive. This idea of “struggle” was originally based upon Thomas Malthus’ theory that predicted: “Animals reproduce so quickly that there will come a time when there will be too many animals and not enough food.” So life will inevitably result in a struggle and only the “fittest” will survive the competition. This idea has carried over into human culture so that we see our daily lives as one long competition driven by the fear of losing the struggle. Unfortunately, Malthus’ idea was found to be scientifically incorrect, consequently the competitive character of Darwinian theory is basically flawed.
New insights offered in biology are now revealing that the biosphere (all the animals and plants together) is a giant integrated community that is truly based upon a cooperation of the species. Nature does not really care about the individuals in a species; Nature cares about what the species as a “whole” is doing to the environment. Simply, Nature does not care that we have had an Einstein, a Mozart or a Michelangelo (examples of humanity’s “fittest”), Nature is more concerned about how human civilization is cutting down the rain forests and changing the climate.
The “new biology” emphasizes that evolution is 1) not an accident and 2) is based upon cooperation, these insights are profoundly different than those offered by conventional Darwinian theory. A newer theory of evolution would emphasize the nature of harmony and community as a driving force behind evolution, ideas that are completely different than today’s notion of life/death competition.
Bruce Lipton versus the Conventional Scientific Establishment
Most conventional scientists simply ignore my ideas and instead favor maintaining conventional beliefs, in spite of the fact that medicine has become the leading cause of death in the United States (see statistics for iatrogenic illness). However, since 2000, I have noted that more and more scientists are beginning to acknowledge that there is indeed a real theoretical basis for the “new science” I present. On a daily basis, newly published scientific research is continuously confirming the ideas presented in my book The Biology of Belief.
For example, Chapter 2 in my book is about how the environment programs the genetic activity of cloned cells. I titled this chapter “It’s the Environment, Stupid”. Four months after the book was published, the prestigious scientific journal Nature had a lead article on how genes in stem cells were being programmed by the environment. They titled their article “It’s the Ecology, Stupid!” I was excited because they were verifying what I wrote and even used the exact same title. (There is an old saying, “Imitation is the sincerest from of flattery,” an indeed, I was flattered by their article!)
It is very difficult for scientists to let go of established beliefs they have been trained with and use in their research. When new insights of science come into their field, many scientists stubbornly prefer to hold on to their outdated views. I believe that science is unintentionally holding back from acknowledging necessary advances we could use in keeping our world from crashing because of the difficulty in releasing limiting beliefs. Yet the new science insights account for what we already know while providing explanations for many of the unexplained observations such as miraculous healings and spontaneous remissions.
Click HERE to Connect with your Daily Horoscope!
To learn more about Bruce Lipton, the New Biology and his books, The Biology of Belief and Spontaneous Evolution, please visit: http://www.brucelipton.com
