Biological Transmutations: Historical Perspective (Jean-Paul Biberian)

We’ve had some interesting discussion here on the topic of biological transmutation recently, and so I thank Dr. Jean-Paul Biberian for permission to upload the following paper here. The title is “Biological Transmutations: Historical Perspective” and was originally published in The Journal of Condensed Matter Nuclear Science, of which Dr. Biberian is the Editor in Chief


In this review paper, it is shown that in biological systems, chemical elements can be transmuted into other elements. These facts have been established since the early 19th century, but they have been ignored by established science ever since. The purpose of this work is to show how during the past two centuries, a number of experimentalists have questioned the mass conservation law established by Antoine Lavoisier [1] for chemical reactions. They have proved experimentally in plants, bacteria and other living organisms, some elements are transmuted into other elements.

Here’s the link to the full text of the article:

  • An other history of biologic transmutations, in french:

  • An other history of biologic transmutations, in french:

  • Gerard McEk

    Is it a coincidence or are most of us cautious aubout this subject, seing so little response. Nowadays the biology knows so much about these things that it is hardly conceivable that this process has been overlooked. They kow the exaxt energy balance of many details of the growing proces. They can start and stop the progress of it. Furthermore, I believe that the very efficient biological energy exchange mechanisms does not seem to be able to excite the nuclear reaction they are supposed to trigger according to this article. In other words: I am very sceptical about this.

    • Pekka Janhunen

      Also, penguins and seals have thick layers of feathers and fat for thermal insulation. And if one doesn’t give enough calcium to hens, they start to peck each other’s feathers. If LENR does occurs in biology, for some reason evolution hasn’t made very big use of it. So, yes, very sceptical.

  • pg

    I don’t know if anybody has posted this already from the Woodford Equity Income Fund website:
    Paul Farrow says:
    August 18, 2015 at 9:19 pm

    Hi John,

    Many thanks for your comment and we’d like to reassure you that we do follow a thorough due diligence process for all our investments, irrespective of their size or the fund they are invested in.
    With regard to Industrial Heat, we were, and have been, very aware of the scepticism about this technology. We have undertaken a rigorous due diligence process that has taken two and half years. The company is currently working with numerous scientists and is acquiring both the technology and teams required to maximise the potential of this, and other, new energy technologies. etc. etc.

    • Sanjeev

      This is a very big endorsement of Rossi and co.
      A major investor saying that his tech works and they know it and back it.
      Need a link.

    • bachcole

      What if our recognition and acceptance problem was never about any form of denial or suppression but rather that the industrial world is so ginormous and this one little company (I.H.) is so small that it took this much time for an investment company to get around to doing 2.5 years of due diligence? Then what?

      The copy did mention “the scepticism”, so what if it is a combination of what I just said plus the scepticism that we all know and love so well?