The Camel Urine Hadith Explained: Context, Science, and Refutation

✅

Then Rabshakeh said, “Has my master sent me to your master and to you to speak these words? Has it not been to the men who sit on the wall, to eat their own dung and drink their own urine with you?”

Acting on what is stated in the book, many Christians have resorted to drinking their own urine as a method of treating some diseases.

Following the same logic of critics, one may ask:

Isn’t this act considered disgusting?

It has been reported:

• 2 million in Japan

• 1 million in the Netherlands

• 5 million in Germany

resorted to forms of urine therapy.

Source:
https://www.psychologies.com/Bien-etre/Medecines-douces/Se-soigner-autrement/Articles-et-Dossiers/Urinotherapie-une-panacee-difficile-a-avaler

A Canadian doctor from Quebec reviewed urine therapy and its claimed effects:

1. Human urine → Urokinase

A recognized pharmaceutical derived from human urine.

References:

http://www.prospecbio.com/Urokinase_Human_8_46/
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/bi00871a003
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0006300257901944
http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/urokinase

Human urine has been used in folk medicine, alternative medicine, and even pharmaceutical derivations.

Therefore critics who mock the camel urine hadith while ignoring similar precedents or biomedical uses apply a double standard.

Testimony attributed to Dr. Shaker Mousa, vice president at Albany College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences:

Research discussed anti-cancer and anti-proliferative properties associated with compounds studied from camel urine.

Claims mentioned:

• anti-proliferation

• anti-inflammatory

• anti-bacterial

• anti-cancer potential

Some pharmaceuticals, cosmetics, and treatments already employ compounds originating from urine.

Therefore ridicule directed uniquely at the prophetic report is argued to be inconsistent.

It is also noted that expensive kopi luwak coffee is produced through animal excretion processing, while rarely provoking comparable disgust arguments.

The argument presented in this dossier is:

1. Critics apply selective disgust.

2. Urine-based therapies have historical and modern precedents.

3. Pharmaceuticals already use urine-derived compounds.

4. Camel urine has been discussed in scientific research.

5. The camel urine hadith should be examined contextually, not polemically.