Dr Elizete Kaffer is a Brazilian dermatologist.

In a video (in Portuguese) she claims, starting from 0:54 (enphasis on the part that I translated):

[After talking about hidden sources for pathologies, e.g. symptoms of eye pathologies can have sources in problems in the epidermis. At 0:34 we see "correlation / embryology / organs and systems", and "Metabolical changes in 1 organ - systemic symptom in another organ!!!".]

Então, o alimento neutro, ele vai ser o quê? Um alimento que, se você tiver muito bem, sobrando energia - não sabe que fazer da vida, quer ter um pouco de prazer - , você vai lá e come um alimento neutro, ou seja, o eletrão tá parado. Aí você vai gastar a sua energia, vai sujar o seu corpo para fazer esse alimento, girar, o eletrão dele girar para a esquerda. Então, a base, se você não detectar isso, é a base de todas as doenças. Todas as doenças começam com alimentos dissonantes.

Which I translate to:

Our body's electrons are stuck, but certain foods make the electrons spin to the left, and the body has to expend energy on it. That's the cause of all disease.

Is this correct?

A second translation, from a native speaker:

[After talking about hidden sources for pathologies, e.g. symptoms of eye pathologies can have sources in problems in the epidermis. At 0:34 we see "correlation / embryology / organs and systems", and "Metabolical changes in 1 organ - systemic symptom in another organ!!!".]

So, the neural food, what is it going to be? Something that you will eat when you are feeling good, you have extra energy and you're feeling without aim in life... so you will eat this neutral food, that is, the [food's?] electron is stopped. Then you will spend your energy, you will dirty your body to make that food, spin, its electron spin to the left. Thus, the source, if you don't detect this problem, this is the source of all diseases. All diseases start with dissonant food.

  • 8
    Why is this question being hammered? What am I missing? It has a testable claim, it is notable, the OP expresses doubt. Sure, the original is not in English, but that's not a downvote reason. – Oddthinking Jul 12 at 21:43
  • 3
    While a doc on YTube is surely notable (how much reach does she have elsewhere; this has 9.5k views), the language barrier makes it quite worthwhile imho to include a bit more context for that quote and the original wording used in it. Too many a contested claim on this site are just OP mishearing, misreading, mistranslating, misunderstanding it. (Not that I say this would be the case here though.) When answerers then just run with that misunderstanding, we see a lot of time wasted. Please add that context, the full video title and original language for proper vid title and excerpt – LangLаngС Jul 12 at 23:14
  • 8
    The premise is nonsense, as the accepted answer says. A question that asks if nonsense is nonsense shows no effort on the part of the OP. – George White Jul 13 at 18:22
  • 11
    @Greybeard: This is intended to be a site for people to ask "Hey, this claim is widely believed, but I am doubtful about it. Is it true?" We should welcome (with upvotes) people who don't understand electron spins (and know they don't know understand it) coming to ask questions like this. We should give answers they can show to their friends and family to say "Well, this is what the evidence shows." – Oddthinking Jul 14 at 4:39
  • 7
    @Greybeard maybe the doctor is a spindoctor? ;) – jwenting Jul 14 at 9:49

The quoted text seems to refer to quantum-mechanical "spin". However "left" or "right" spin are not part of that concept, and it has nothing at all to do with the food we eat. It is also unclear how an electron can be "stuck". Taken as a whole the first sentence seems to be nonsense.

"That's the cause of all disease." is clearly false. We know what causes lots of diseases. For instance, many are caused by infectious agents. We can see how one person with the disease infects others, and we can isolate the agent that causes the disease. Electron spin has nothing to do with this.

In short, the quoted text is just woo; the misappropriation of scientific vocabulary in the service of nonsense.


I find it strange that they should talk about electron spin to the left. Electron spin is usually considered "up" or "down" and is quite arbitary. The concept of electron spin direction is not to be taken literally as say a ball spins. As the electron is a point particle it wouldn't really make sense. Rather it is found that electrons have an extra component of internal angular momentum that can not be accounted for by its rotation.

Also regardless of electron spin, it still has charge. Electron charge is a fundamental constant of nature.

I think there might be some confusion with spin that does not strongly affect chemistry and electron number which does. If the atom is to lose electrons it can ionise or does not have a full valence shell can lead to a free radical that can affect the body chemistry and can indeed cause disease including cancer.

This information can be found in many textbooks but a quick search found Electron Spin http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/spin.html

Electron Charge https://www.britannica.com/science/electron-charge

Free radicals https://chem.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Organic_Chemistry/Supplemental_Modules_%28Organic_Chemistry%29/Fundamentals/Reactive_Intermediates/Free_Radicals

Free radical and cancer https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/diet/antioxidants-fact-sheet


You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .