hot "mugga funggin" wax said...
Under cover,The cold is the cure! Check this- start your car. Go around the back inhale for about 5-10 minutes by the exhaust pipes. Wait 24 hours; then enjoy the fever, chills, mucus, sneezing etc., that you will start to have. Go to the Dr.(hopefully DMG :)) and I will bet 50 large that he says that you have the flu (scientifically proven in studies- they were not able to tell the difference).
You see toxemia is acidity (toxins are acids). Your lungs took in large amounts of toxic exhaust fumes(acids) and needed to get rid of if ( too much at one time). When your body needs to get rid of these poisons(acids) you can crap, sweat, piss , up chuck , and finally cough /expel via (mucus) the poisons(acids) out of the body.
When your immune system/body is pushed to the limit and/or the terrain is stressed(acidic) and the body can't handle it, your system will create a crisis (cold,fever-heat, mucus) to throw out the poisons(acids). Somehow we call this healing "the dis-ease" and ask Pharmakia for deadly elixirs( more acids) to suppress the healing (cough medicine). Oh sweet Alchemy! UC, a couple of days of fasting, resting (mentally and physically), sunlight and pure water(no fluoride) will clear the cold ( speed up the healing via expelling acids) right up. Look at nature- that's how my dog do it. Doesn't need no Damm Aleive! :) don't blame yourself as weak or unhealthy when you have a cold- In the case above many things can cause it (no matter how strong you are( ex.-eating poison beef will give you flu like symptoms)) The body will protect and detoxify (cold) itself when up against sudden acidity (you took in an unsustainable level of poisons in the example above). Work on reducing the toxins we have around us first and we will all be OK.
140 comments:
Again I ask Bro. Wax to help me understand. Bro. Wax: Let's say your girl's got a sore throat, runny nose, cough, body aches. Then let's say you kissed her on the mouth, long and deep.
Is it likely that you too, then, would exhibit the same symptoms within a couple of days?
If so, would this be because suddenly your "terrain is stressed(acidic)"? Or would it be because the same RHINOVIRUS infecting your girl's body is now infecting yours?
Also, DV, you cute illustration of school children clicked something in my brain. I realize I asked you the wrong question... concerning whether you catch colds.
Better question is: Do your kids catch colds... particularly during the school year?
If so... is this because their "terrains are stressed (acidic)"? Or is it because of a RHINOVIRUS or some other virus they picked up from a classmate?
Good question UB.
Got 3 kids. My oldest got about half the recommended vaccines as a child. His mother and I were young, and didn't really know any better.
By the time we had our second son we were up on it and resisted the vaccines and the circumcision. However we did relent to family pressure and we went along with 1 of the vaccines. I don't remember which.
My daughter ... (lord ha' mercy I luv that little girl) ... By the time we had her I was Denmark Vesey to the bone. I had a pistol in my pocket right there in Cedars Sinai ready to blast anybody came near my baby with a needle.
She had 0 vaccines.
Now. If anybody catches a cold it's my oldest boy. Dude always walking around sniflin'. Shows "allergy" like symptoms to things (weakened immune system).
Bam Bam. My undefeated vegetarian youngest son is a beast. Run through mud puddles type cat. Carries a pocket knife and plays in creeks. Type of dude to track mud in the house.
If he gets sick, it's because of something he ate. Can't remember him having a "cold" in a minute.
Booooga A Boooooo ... my little girl JUST DON'T GET SICK.
No bullshit man. Might eat too much sugar, run around outside in the cold barefoot ... catch a little fever and she's right back at the next day.
But no snotty nose, hack hack hack, "colds" caught from school coodies.
Now. Just so happens my wife, kids and I test out ph balance all the time. Get these little strips called phIon from the health food store.
My wife, my oldest son and I are always on the border, slightly acidic. My middle son alkaline. Booga Boo's stip is so dark green it looks like a crayon. Super alkaline = rarely sick.
^ Well, that seals it then.
One more question, DV, if you will indulge me. Are you saying you don't believe that viruses cause disease?
UC, DV is right on it with the example of his kids. Most of the "cold" symptoms ( crisis detoxification) takes place when the pipes aren't doing their job. The oldest medical advice or statement that I have heard is that all diseases begins in the gut. When it is clean and working right( 2 to 3 craps per day) you will find it hard to "catch" anything if you are doing every thing else right. Bam Bam is doing it the right way and truly living old school. Your kissing girl friend example goes back to the Germanic witchcraft age again because it uses the boggieman fear technique. Two facts that everyone refuses to discuss about viruses is 1) the latin meaning of the word virus is "liquid poison" and 2) a virus is a protein sheath(particle) that no one can prove that it is alive( how can you kill it?). We give them a mean monster face etc. etc. and we just started trying to identify them via new modern technology. Most people don't even know that many of the pictures of viruses are artificially colored in-really really hard to see. Always remember most bacteria are vultures and scavengers and clean up the mess we make -they morph-mold,fungus etc.. They normally don't "attack" (it is a "phunkin" particle)healthy tissue and people. If that was the case a lot of people taking care of the sick would be dead. I have slept with my wife many times when she was really sick like you described (Sorry Honey) and nothing jumped on me. Why? Because I am probably worse that DV in my obsession to have the very best organic, local, grass fed, foods only(no matter the cost). 5000 dollar Hexoganal water is the only thing I drink, Daylight Diet eating, avoid all EMFs, coconut oil drinking, etc. etc. (You get the picture). I have very sanitary habits, however I do stress about eating something that falls on the ground for example because my fear of "the microbe"(particle) is in check. I know that "contagion theory" has been a little bit co-opted by our allopathic friends.
You see Undercover Virus Mania is what is driving us crazy.
Avian Flu (H5N1), Cervical Cancer (HPV), SARS, BSE, Hepatitis C, AIDS, Polio , Booga Boo. The Medical Industry Continually Invents Epidemics, Making Billion-Dollar Profits at Our Expense. A book by Torsten Engelbrecht and Claus Köhnlein The authors of Virus Mania, shows that these alleged contagious viruses are, in fact, "particles" produced by the cells themselves as a consequence of certain stress factors such as drugs.:) These particles are then identified by antibody and PCR tests and interpreted as epidemic-causing viruses by doctors(DMG) who have been inoculated for over 100 years by the theory that microbes are deadly and only modern medications and vaccines will protect us from virus pandemics. Stop the madness. Love and Light my man. I hope this help.
So, Hot Wax... are you saying you don't believe that viruses cause disease?
DV,
That's very interesting about your kids. Thanks for sharing.
I do have a question though if you don't mind. Do you ever travel abroad with your children? If so, and considering their vaccination status, you have no concern whatsoever about them catching something deadly?
Undercover Black Man said...
"One more question, DV, if you will indulge me. Are you saying you don't believe that viruses cause disease?"
UB,
I tend to agree with Louis Pasteur when on his death bed, he said: "Bernard was right... the microbe is nothing; the terrain is everything."
So... UBM ... we've been through your Mike Fisheresque game of Socratic Booby Traps unscathed ... please share with us what you think.
Do you really thing little specific microbes "make you sick" with particular "diseases"?
What up NEA?!
Vaccinations?
Why?
What on earth makes us think injecting particular microbes into our children's bodies makes them "healthier"?
Whey dem bumbaclot get dat frum?
Is there any evidence these vaccinations "work"?
Sounds like a Xenophobic hustle to me.
Dee-Vee you kill me with your headlines and imagery.
"Teacher teacher tell me how you do it, it looks kinda easy like there was nothing to it.
But they don't understand that the ruler will be the creator of the style Ricky D"
-Slick Rick
I don't really know DV. This is a serious matter demanding serious thought, research and study. Especially because it concerns our kids.
I'm leaning toward your stance when it comes to flu vaccines but I'm not fully convinced that we should ban vaccines all together. It seems a little extreme.
I am vaccinated and I am very healthy so my thing is I should give my kids at least the vaccinations I received. And mind you I received my vaccines in the third world.
Flu vaccines are a different story. I have never had the flu in my life and I work at a hospital. We are required to get the flu vaccines but thankfully one can sign a waiver and avoid getting shot. I happily sign that ish every year. Some of my coworkers get them religiously and still get sick at least once a year. Some who receive the shots don't get sick. So, it's a hit and miss. Still, I can't help but to think that those who are receiving the shots are putting themselves at some kinda risk each time. Is it worth it?, since you can or can not get sick anyway. I don't see a reason why I should do it. This is a no brainer.
Childhood vaccines are not as cut and dry, at least not for me.
DV, I wanted to add, I commend you for what you are doing. You are doing what you believe is the best for your kids. And no one can argue with you regarding that, that's your business.
Even if one is to believe in vaccines, the people who are developing and administering vaccinations are questionable. Blind faith manifests in many forms. Everybody won't trust the same sources mostly due to track records. We are to always rule out past aggressions and atrocities on the part of our rulers but on a domestic level an ex-con's record follows them throughout their life.
So the same logic one might appropriate to an individual who's sincerity or trustfulness is dismissed due to past actions before their "rehabilitation, this is the identical logic that is administered to government entities that refuse to even admit to guilt for unpaid "debts to society."
I believe in law & order, but 1 out of 3 black men in prison? I question the overseers.
"Officer, officer, officeseer, oviceseer, overseer, overseer"
-KRS One
If viruses cause disease then so must vaccines. Secondly, because vaccines are a finite resource and some disease more easily than others, mandatory vaccines are immoral and unfeasible.
But the paradigm needs shifting as it places the status of "threat" upon the "uninfected." If viruses cause disease and vaccines are fundamentally viruses then the "threats" are the diseased and vaccinated and the threatened are the healthy.
This healthy segment represents a non-diversified group that is subject to the constant threat of an increasingly diversified "terrain" and an all-inclusive regime that seeks total infection.
So... UBM ... we've been through your Mike Fisheresque game of Socratic Booby Traps unscathed ...
Ahhh, you smelled me coming. Nevertheless, DV, you put your Stacy Adams half-boot into the steel teeth of my trap.
You believe "the microbe is nothing; the terrain is everything." So explain to me this, Denmark:
Why did many MILLIONS of indigenous people DIE in the Americas soon after being exposed to European diseases such as smallpox, measles, influenza and typhus?
Is it because the Indians, who had thrived for centuries, suddenly became "acidic"? Or was it because of viruses and bacteria that spread via contagion?
Whatcha doin', DV? Trying to chew your leg off?
LOL...
Oh!
Hey man.
LOL. Shiiii ...
Are you serious?
That's pretty funny UB.
Skipping all the "who's right vs. who's wrong" rhetoric ... I find it fascinating how two cats can see things so fundamentally differently.
I mean ... I thought the gaping holes in the Boogy Man Virus theory pointed out by bra Hot Wax were so obvious it was over kill.
I mean ... I intended to spank you Plantation Medicine Fanatics ... not pistol whip you.
But if I'm not mistaken .. YOU ... seem to think those of us who laugh at the "Monster Microbe" theory are somehow on our heels.
LOLLLLLL ... ahhhh boy.
This is some wild shit.
I feel like I'm talking to a dude who swears up and down the Colts beat the Saints last Sunday.
OK. I'll play along.
Now you asked:
"Why did many MILLIONS of indigenous people DIE in the Americas soon after being exposed to European diseases such as smallpox, measles, influenza and typhus?" UBM
...
...
...
Stress.
& Gunshots.
What?
You really thought MILLIONS of people died from stank Indian blankets?
LOLLLLL ....
UB. I'm over here ... STILL gigglin' my ass off.
""Why did many MILLIONS of indigenous people DIE in the Americas soon after being exposed to European diseases"
That's like saying:
"Why did many JEWISH people DIE in Germany soon after being exposed to Nazi diseases?"
LOL.
UBM ... My Plantation Enthusiast Friend ...
Indigenous people did not just "die".
They were killed off. Murdered. Ran off the land. Invaded. Occupied. Divided. Raped.
What's next?
The Great Buffalo Herds "died off" after being "exposed" to European diseases too?
No UB. They were exposed to gunfire.
Is there any Plantation Conspiracy Theory you have not adopted as scripture?
Stress? STRESS???
DV, you a wild boy. Keep on chewing at that leg, brah. You might get out the trap... in a few weeks or so.
But seriously... a population of 25 million Aztecs declined by 80 PERCENT in the space of a mere 60 YEARS... because of “stress.” Because their blood suddenly went from “alkaline” to “acidic.”
And the smallpox virus ain’t have shit to do with it, huh?
Denmark Denmark Denmark... you are heeeee-larious, man.
Musta took a shitload of bullets to gun down 20 million Aztecs. And in the 16th Century too! When they didn't even have Uzis!
DV, you are a constant delight.
The great danger of idealism lies in the fact that it turns men into fools. It can turn them into honest fools. It can turn them into sanctimonious fools. That is only a difference of degree. The decisive point is that because of all this idealism, and through the extravagant, everyday invocation of the highest ideals, reality may perish.
Moeller van den Bruck
WESTERN MEDICINE & THE CULTURE OF KILLING
Associated with the use and abuse of antibiotics is the culture of killing that has developed within modern medicine - again thanks to the germ theory of disease.
Many medical treatments are based on the idea of killing, or otherwise removing the "enemy". Infectious diseases are treated by killing bacteria and viruses. Cancer is treated by killing cancer cells. Heart disease is treated by surgery to remove blocked arteries. And so on.
Doctors have become so obsessed with "killing the enemy" that they don't even care if the patient suffers as a result of it. Chemotherapy and radiation treatment for cancer are prime examples. They cause such horrible side effects that patients suffer more as a result of these treatments. And they die more from the side effects of these treatments than from the cancer itself.
Chemotherapy treatment for cancer, for example, greatly reduces the patient's immune response. As a result, they might succumb easily to infection and die from pneumonia, tuberculosis, etc - not from cancer. Likewise, patients who undergo organ transplant have to take immune suppressing drugs - and be very careful to guard against infectious diseases.
Actually I was going to ask about the Native Americans.
Anonymous where is that from...website, book?
The psychology of killing to survive. Attack the threat even if that threat is overseas and can't reach you. Like Thordaddy pointed out the paradigm needs shifting as it places the status of "threat" upon the "uninfected."
How the other worlds that exist within our bodies are parallel to the worlds out side. This culture reacts to the inner world the way it reacts to the outer.
Interesting.
^ Yeah, I guess the polio virus has a right to exist just like anything.
Actually I was going to ask about the Native Americans.
Yes, Gee-Chee, to my mind it is a hugely persuasive refutation of DV's meme-of-the-week... that viruses and bacteria don't cause disease. We're talking about population collapse on a mind-blowing scale.
Or are you persuaded by Denmark's "stress" theory??
UB ... let's put this in terms to which you can relate.
For Example:
There is no physical evidence of Jews or anyone else ever being "murdered in Nazi gas chambers' during WWII.
...
(There isn't man. Check it out. Don't mean to be "anti-Semitic" just want to tell the truth. Zyclon B yada yada ... it didn't happen.)
However, thousands of Jews and millions of Poles and Russians DID DIE at the camps due to Typhus.
Did the obligate parasite Rickettsia (Typhus) kill those thousands of Jews and millions of Poles and Russians ... or did the conditions and stress of the camps weaken the immune systems of the inmates making them vulnerable to any number disease like conditions?
Did the microbe produce the disease?
Or does the diseased condition produce the microbe?
Did the Nazis kill those Jews and
Russians and Poles?
Or did a "microbe" kill them?
I believe the Nazis who created the conditions of the camps murdered those Jews.
The gunpowder wielding gold seeking mass murdering conquistadors killed the Aztecs just as the Nazis killed the Jews.
Smallpox killed millions in Europe.
Not because they were "exposed" to the microbe ... but because they were exposed to shitty water in overcrowded cities. A condition. Not a "monster virus".
Get it now UB?
Hope that helps.
(Sometimes you gotta talk to cats in the only way they can relate. The reality of millions of unexplained African deaths aint going move him to see the light)
Still don't understand why it can't be both.
There are germs, and you as a human are more likely to fall prey if you don't take care of your body.
I mean, that's why old folks forced you to drink castor oil and cod liver oil every year with a peppermint. And eat your carrots and wash your hands.
I don't see the conflict here. Germs cause diseases in the people who can't fight them off naturally.
Equip your body to fight off germs, and reduce your contact with germs.
Isn't that standard practice for everybody?
lol...,
Big Man and Submariner are truth.
(but it's so much fun to watch the pigs use their snouts to push oranges around the pen - almost as if they were in a world cup soccer match)
"I mean, that's why old folks forced you to drink castor oil and cod liver oil every year with a peppermint. And eat your carrots and wash your hands." Big Man
Big Man.
Do the old folks ask you to wash your hands or do they squirt a 'Hand Germ Vaccine' up your nose?
...
...
That's why it can't "be both".
If you didn't wash your hands, what would happen?
Would a particular Hand Germ Virus cause your demise ... or would your overall state of health deteriorate?
If you didn't whipe your ass ... what would happen?
... yuck ...
Would a "particular Ass Virus" kill you?
Or would you eventually die of just plain ol' nastiness?
Would you need a "Nasty Ass X1N1 Vaccine"?
Or would you just need some toilet paper and an ass whupping?
I've got two aunts.
When you go to Aunt Connie's house ... you are taking your shoes off at the door. You are not tracking "the outside into her house". You are not stomping through the house with shopping mall and elementary school coodies / energy in her crib.
You can wear your shoes in Aunt Jan's house. She's got wall to wall carpet in some places. Doesn't matter.
Underneath Jan's kitchen sink is a laboratory of chemical rug cleansers, Anti-Septic This n That, Lysol, Simply Green, Woolite, Foam Spray Cleansers That Kill Bugs Dead.
She thinks she can "kill her way clean".
Aunt Jan stay sick.
That's why it can't be "bof".
CNu!
My man.
Let me guess. You saw this on Star Trek once right?
Or you just want to get to the part where 4/5th's of Humanity Dies and the rest live on the electricity generated by bacteria.
I don't see the conflict here. Germs cause diseases in the people who can't fight them off naturally.
Indeed, Big Man. Which is why the allopathic approach which focuses of killing the germ rather than strengthening the body's ability to fight the germ naturally is completely off base. As you point out, our elders were far wiser than the quacks in white coats - cod liver oil, which strengthens your body, instead of drugs, which impair your immune system.
If I feel a hint of scratchy throat (my sign I've let myself get too acidic), I get back on the apple cider vinegar bandwagon and all is well with the world. If I called my sister, I'd have a prescription for something toxic that may give me the illusion of being better in the short run, but destroy my body over the long run.
A few weeks ago, I let my daughter overindulge on grains and, sure enough, she got a cough. So she's been alkaline the past week and, voila, cough is gone.
NEA:
Do you ever travel abroad with your children? If so, and considering their vaccination status, you have no concern whatsoever about them catching something deadly?
I do and my daughter is completely unvaccinated. Read the CDC recommendations for vaccines in Egypt and you would think my daughter was heading to a death trap, but she was perfectly fine. We ate as well as we could, took some colloidal silver to irrigate our sinuses each day and none of us got so much as a cold in a month. And there are few places as polluted and filthy as Cairo.
SuuuuuuuubMariiiiiinerrrrr!
The Most Elegant Intellect On The Internet.
"Idealism".
That's what you choose to talk about Bra?
All them young black men dying of what we are told is "HIV/AIDS", the bullshit of the Western Blot test and the poison of AZT ... and you quoting poets talking about "Idealism"?
I guess that's easier than admitting "treating HIV" was a deadly waste of time.
Did the microbe produce the disease?
Or does the diseased condition produce the microbe?
Consider Australia in the late 1700s.
"[I]t is estimated that within the first two years of British settlement, almost half of the Aboriginal peoples living in the Port Jackson area had died of smallpox.
"Within three years, the majority of Indigenous people living close to Sydney were killed by smallpox. Only small pockets of Indigenous peoples were left to survive in their own country.
"As the Europeans and infected Indigenous peoples moved inland, the diseases moved with them. Smallpox was spread down the Murray River to South Australia and up and down the coast from Sydney.
"In Tasmania, according to British estimates, smallpox destroyed half of the Indigenous peoples that came into contact with Port Arthur." (Source.)
Pretty fuckin' obvious, ain't it?
The Aborigines were "acidic"!
LOL!!
^^ Well ...
UnderCoverBlack Man ...
We KNOW the Aborigines were not killed by the British "Settlers"!
Don't We?
The British WOULD NEVER JUST KILL THE INDIGENOUS POPULATION.
NEVERRRRRRR
Those native people just dropped dead on site when they encountered the British.
Yup.
The BRITISH did not kill the Aborigines ... an invisible "microbe" did it.
"Maassaaa Woodn't killlzzz NoBahDey! Demz peepuz all died NATUWALLY!!"
UBM, this description of Australia is pathetically simplistic.
"[I]t is estimated that within the first two years of British settlement, almost half of the Aboriginal peoples living in the Port Jackson area had died of smallpox.
Yeah right.
If the author of this piece wanted to be accurate, it would more appropriately read -
"[I]t is estimated that within the first two years of British theft, the British forced almost half of the Aboriginal peoples from their land where they were able to grow food, crowded the Aboriginal peoples into unsanitary living conditions in the Port Jackson area, deprived them of access to all but the filthiest water and essentially starved them. The resultant malnourishment caused mass deaths.
In your scenario, which fits your worldview so well, smallpox was the culprit. In reality, the British were the cause of the scenario, they were cause of the starvation and malnourishment that destroyed these peoples' immune systems.
Let me guess. You saw this on Star Trek once right?
It was attributed to Mullah Nasruddin talking about the knowledge/cognition of idiots. Bearing in mind that Nasruddin was a Sufi(Muslim) archetype - the "pig" figuration is especially pointed.
...that the so-styled "grammar" of any language is compiled by people who not only in respect of knowledge of the given language are those biped "somethings" which His Uniqueness Mullah Nassr Eddin characterizes by the words "all-they-can-do-is-to-wrangle-with-pigs-about-the-quality-of-oranges"...
fits some'a'y'all to.a.tee.....,
In reality, the British... were cause of the starvation and malnourishment that destroyed these peoples' immune systems.
II... you want a spanking too? Is your hiney jealous of all the attention I’ve been lavishing upon Denmark today?
Okay. Drop yer drawers and touch your toes, and let me get the big paddle. Because you don’t know what the hell you’re talking about. You just making shit up.
The easily accessible fact is... Aborigines started dropping dead of smallpox before they were “crowded into unsanitary living conditions” or otherwise victimized by your fantasized brutish white oppressors.
Read and learn:
“In April 1789, just over fifteen months after the First Fleet of British convicts, sailors and marines had arrived in Port Jackson, the Aborigines of the Sydney region were seen to be dying in large numbers in the vicinity of the British settlement....
"From the journals of the British in the First Fleet it is clear that they died from a smallpox virus, for the people of the First Fleet knew smallpox when they saw it.”
Note the year. A smallpox outbreak among the Aborigines in 1789.
At this point, “relations between the explorers and the Aboriginal inhabitants were generally hospitable and based on understanding the terms of trading for food, water, axes, cloth and artefacts, a relationship encouraged by Governor Phillip.”
(Sources provided upon request.)
In other words, at the time of this first smallpox outbreak... the Aborigines hadn’t been herded into concentration camps and malnourished and forced to drink dirty water.
Matter fact, in 1790... and for two decades afterward... aboriginal clans waged armed resistance against the colonizers. So obviously they hadn’t been vanquished yet.
So don’t make shit up, II. Not when you step to me.
Okay, pull your undies up and go stand in the corner.
UBM does bring up valid points, as do Big Man and Submariner. DV, you quote Pasteur and emphasize how the terrain is more important than the microbe, but then say how microbes don't cause disease. That makes no sense because the implication of the quote was that microbes affect the body, depending on the body composition etc.
II, you said that the Aborigines were placed in filthy conditions etc and then got sick. Well, what gets people sick when they live in filth?
BACTERIAL contamination. Why do people get sick when they are exposed to listeria or ecoli? These bacteria wreak havoc on the immune system whether it is in tip top condition or not. AND listeria and ecoli are precisely the types of nasty bugs that abound in fecal contaminated water etc. Furthermore, if the water temperature is close to room temperature, then things like cholora can come about as well.
And granted, when people are herded like cattle, they get stressed and their immune systems aren't functioning at peak efficiency. But if microbes didn't cause disease, it wouldn't matter how run down the immune system is would it? Your explanations to UBM couldn't be more ridiculous.
But if microbes didn't cause disease, it wouldn't matter how run down the immune system is would it?
Brilliant point. Simply brilliant.
"In April 1789, just over fifteen months after the First Fleet of British convicts, sailors and marines had arrived in Port Jackson, the Aborigines of the Sydney region were seen to be dying in large numbers in the vicinity of the British settlement...."
LOL.
The "microbes" must have had gats.
Because you know British "convicts" & "marines" wouldn't harm black Aborigines.
"Well, what gets people sick when they live in filth? "
Lack of clean?
But if microbes didn't cause disease, it wouldn't matter how run down the immune system is would it?" Mahndisa
...
...
uh ...
If microbes did cause disease, it wouldn't matter how strong the immune system is would it?
Man ... school fucked some of ya'll up.
Okay. Drop yer drawers and touch your toes, and let me get the big paddle. Because you don’t know what the hell you’re talking about. You just making shit up.
rotflmbao...oh lawd...,
fek up in this mug whoopin asses like it was his job!!!!
If microbes did cause disease, it wouldn't matter how strong the immune system is would it?
ROTFLMBAO!!!!
hot.black.coffee.out.the.nostrils
this one just earned an all-time special commendation in the denmarkvesey pink-salt palace of pointy-headed nostrums....,
OH? DV you haven't addressed the substance of what I've said or even UBM. You say school fucked some of us up, but in what way? In the way that we ask questions that might contradict some of your thin, very very very thin declarations?!
Break it down for me. What does Pasteur's quote mean in plain English? And unless you are talking about an autoimmune disorder like Lupus where the body eats its good cells, the statements you've made seem without merit.
Not to say that blood alkalinity or eating healthy won't help a person, but to ignore the fact that disease states are contagious is willfully ignorant.
And your statement about a lack of clean is priceless and utter bullshit. C'mon be consistent with what you espouse!
What is it about a lack of clean and nasty living conditions that get otherwise healthy people sick? From what I've read, the Native Americans and Aborigines were in hellaciously good physical condition when the Europeans came. Often the Europeans couldn't catch them if chasing them by foot etc.
So how did such a healthy population get decimated so quickly at that time? It wasn't all gunshot wounds and forced movement to reservations occurred two to three hundred years after the white man came, so what got those healthy Natives so ill?
If microbes didn't cause disease, it wouldn't matter how strong the immune system is would it?
Making sure I'm not misquoted;)
An argument of extremes breeds idiocy.
Ms. Rigmaiden has the proper handle on Denmark's dubious thinking. So let me double back to something DV wrote upthread:
"Smallpox killed millions in Europe.
"Not because they were 'exposed' to the microbe ... but because they were exposed to shitty water in overcrowded cities. A condition. Not a 'monster virus'."
Okay then, DV. Please explain what's wrong with shitty water? What is unhealthy about it? What's unhealthy about overcrowded cities? Why are these "conditions" bad for the human body?
II, you said that the Aborigines were placed in filthy conditions etc and then got sick. Well, what gets people sick when they live in filth?
I'm not arguing this point. Please re-read my comment to Big Man.
"From the journals of the British in the First Fleet it is clear that they died from a smallpox virus, for the people of the First Fleet knew smallpox when they saw it.”?
Uh huh. Just like all doctors know the flu when they see it.
Seriously, as long as a White guy says it, it must be true. And if they are British, well then they are Gods who can diagnose a disease just by looking at it. LOL!!! Hilarious.
II, from looking at your answer, my question remains the same. Apparently you have blamed the British for getting these native sick.
So did the British force them to be exposed to microbes which cause disease or not? Because I think that was the point of the thread. You are somewhat vague here. As to making quotes about a white guy saying something and then us believing it to be true. What a cheap shot!
If "microbes" are THE cause of disease ...
Why do you wear coats in the winter time?
Why not walk around in the pristine freezing cold snow barefoot and butt naked?
...
...
Are there more germs in your 75 degree home or outside on the 20 degree ice and snow ....?
Think about it now.
Yes .. Yes. Go Google.
OK.
Still wit me?
Do we wear clothes to "protect" us from microbes?
...
...
SeeWhatI'mSayin'?
Let me guess. lol.
Thinking like this is "extreme".
It's only extreme to those uncomfortable thinking for themselves.
Lastly, identification of small pox by visual inspection is very simple if you've seen it before. It was not unreasonable for those Brits to assume that their plan to eradicate the natives with small pox worked, based upon eye witness accounts. Here is a picture.
You wear clothes to protect you from extreme temperatures. I've never put on a coat with the thought of protecting myself against microbes. I put on my thick coat because I am sensitive to the elements of WEATHER.
Your response to my inquiry is depressingly void of meaning.
I'm not arguing this point. Please re-read my comment to Big Man.
lol,
There go Dina!!
She heard that paddle clapping like thunder all up in DV's silly behind - and turned around, went to tugging her little capris back up, pulling her burka back down, and scrambling for the door like the house was on fire....,
Don't let her get out the door Mahndisa, not without a few good strokes from that freshly peeled switch in your hand.
So did the British force them to be exposed to microbes which cause disease or not? Because I think that was the point of the thread.
That's not my take on the point of the thread. My take away is that acidity is what permits disease to thrive. As I said to Big Man, if that is true, then the allopathic approach to "healing", which focuses only on destroying the germ rather than producing alkalinity in the body is a pointless endeavor. The patient will remain chronically ill whether you kill one microbe or one thousand because the cause - the acidity - is never remedied.
People who take antibiotics should be the healthiest on the planet, and yet studies have tied use of it to lymphoma. Why?
Because it destroys the body's ability to fight off disease.
Thanks for the small pox picture. Good point. :-)
^^ What thread is LeVar reading?
Coffee out the nose?
Clapping your hands to UBM's Freudian masochistic fantasies?
Please.
You tryin' too hard Festas.
"If microbes didn't cause disease, it wouldn't matter how strong the immune system is would it?" Mahndisa
If microbes DO CAUSE disease ... why bother to wear clothes?
Why Are People Who Take The Most Anti-Biotics ... Not The Healthiest People?
"OH? DV you haven't addressed the substance of what I've said or even UBM. You say school fucked some of us up, but in what way? "
You are not thinkers.
You come to your conclusions based upon authority.
For example:
The British INVADE Australia in 1790.
2 years later the Aborigines are dead and displaced.
The BRITISH say they all died of "small pox".
You accept that because the British "said" it.
Not because you think that is most likely what happened.
You argue that HIV IS THE CAUSE OF AIDS ... not because you understand that hypothesis and you have observed evidence that supports that contention. You champion that meme because you got it from ... "authority".
The inconsistency in the HIV / AIDS Conspiracy Theory mean nothing to you ... until you get it from AUTHORITY.
MASSA.
Ergo: "Plantation Negro"
kneegrow,
I hurt myself laughing at your antics this afternoon.
Hands-down, you do some of the finest clowning to be found anywhere in the world on these interwebs.
If microbes DO CAUSE disease ... why bother to wear clothes?
and the comedy just keeps on rolling...,
WHAT are you taking today DV?
Quit frontin' nerd.
LOL
When you started Hi-Fiving & diving across the thread to kiss UBM's ass you broke the all time Trying Too Hard record.
The "Germ Theory of Disease" is as weak as that "2,000 Watts Per Day" Malthusian roach motel of a Star Trek episode you been talking about.
Big Man said...
"An argument of extremes breeds idiocy."
LOL. Don't let 'em gas you up Plato.
You usual middle of the road No Position / Position wasn't really that deep.
Yeah DV, you are tripping hard today. Back in the day, I'da asked you if I could try some myself but...I need my mental faculties so I'll pass for today;)
Dina, antibiotics are a double edged sword, but I am not certain if that's the point of the discussion. AB's kill beneficial bacteria and bad bacteria. This says absolutely nothing about whether or not the notion of killing bad microbes is unviable...more or less, it says that we have a sledge hammer when we ought to be using a scalpel.
Technology develops. I'd just as soon take raw garlic over antibiotics because raw garlic doesn't kill beneficial bacteria but ABs DO.
Does that mean that I don't believe microbes coupled to compromised immune functioning don't cause disease? No. It simply means that there is more than one way to skin a cat. In fact, you've mentioned that you use Probiotic soap before (I think it was on the salt threads).
The concept of probiotics are that they are beneficial bacteria that are routinely stripped from our systems via our diets, medications and so forth. When you take probiotic supplements or use that soap, you are infusing your body with MICROBES that have a beneficial function.
Similarly, were you to go to some place, sleep in filth and drink shit tainted water, I'm certain you'd be in the company of BAD MICROBES which do not have a beneficial function and could tear your ass up.
What about filthy living conditions causes the body to accumulate acidity and thus make it sick, according to your way of thinking?
And if your thoughts on alkalinity of the blood are true, can you explain whether or not microbes could affect the alkalinity of the blood?
You wear clothes to protect you from extreme temperatures. I've never put on a coat with the thought of protecting myself against microbes. I put on my thick coat because I am sensitive to the elements of WEATHER."
Mahndisa ...
If you didn't wear your coat ... what would happen?
Your body would have a difficult time maintaining 98.6 degrees wouldn't it?
You would get goose bumps.
You would shiver.
Why?
After a period of time ... you nose would run wouldn't it?
You may even sneeze after about an hour or so.
Later on the coughing would start.
Why?
Because you were suddenly exposed to a MICROBE?
Or ...
Did conditions inside your body change?
Come on now ...
Think about this.
Mandisa is in the middle of Antarctica.
It is 12 degrees below zero.
She is wearing a halter top and jeans.
Undercover Black Man wearing a tank top and some poom poom shorts.
Both of ya'll are sick as dogs.
What did it?
"Microbes" ... or a weakened immune system?
DV
Don't worry about me getting gassed up, I like riding on E. (Hat tip to Drake.)
I take the middle of the road when it makes sense.
Weren't you just complaing about my hardline stance on right and wrong on that other thread?
Gotta make up your mind son. Either I won't commit, or I'm too dogmatic.
Can't be both.
Maybe, I just don't like stupid discussion where people yell at each other instead of trying to figure out what makes sense.
You and Hot Wax seem to be arguing that a lack of personal health causes sickness regardless of any outside influences. UBM is calling that hogwash and pointing out all the times that healthy people have gotten sick.
Both of y'all seem to be ignoring the forest for the trees.
You get sick because you're not healthy and germs exist.
I'm still trying to figure out why you're working so hard to reject that idea. What's the problem?
It's obvious that when you praised the Plantation Medicine system of triage, you understood that their procedures to restrict germs and contamination made sense.
When you argued with UBM about the polo virus you argued that the Polk Vaccine was meaningless, it was increased sanitation that improved people's health.
So, you have a history of recognizing the efficacy of preventing the spread of disease and infection by reducing germs and improving personal hygiene.
Yet, now you're arguing that's ludicrous.
Why? Why blatantly contradict yourself? To have a pissing contest? Because you can't remember what you wrote? What's the reason?
Sheeeeeeeeeet now you grasping for straws my man. But to humor your question, it was proven a while ago that cold temperatures don't cause colds. Some bacteria and viruses LIKE cold weather and hate hot humid environments (eg the flu). I have tested this on myself by going outside for a few minutes in VERY cold weather; I even did it in the mountains with no shirt when it was snowing. Aside from being cold, I didn't get sick otherwise.
Besides that, you have still not answered the questions posed above, likely because your delusions are so apparent you cannot even justify them.
I expected better of you.
Yeah Big Man, you are reasonable and right. Nothing to it brother! As to DV's silly scenario about Antarctica, well me and UBM in Antarctica with improper clothing would likely land us hypothermia if we survived. We would chatter and shake as our bodies tried to increase their temperatures and so forth. But upon autopsy (if we died) the cause of death would not be a microbe but would be extreme weather events that effectively shut our hearts down. Exclusive events which have nothing to do with the substance of this thread.
Big Man, sometimes what we ingest can affect our mental faculties. I think DV needs to try to grass fed BEEF and raw milk because animal protein helps develop brain cells. hheheheheheheheh
The comments above are hilarious. However, learn about "cause and effect".
We are made up of 90 % bacteria.
Single cell microscopic organisms (bacteria) are involved in many functions of our entire world (NEITHER GOOD OR BAD). Heard of probiotics?
Your fear base ego is destroying your scientific rationality.
YOU ARE BLAMING THE FLIES FOR THE Trash! THE FLIES ARE THE EFFECT OF THE TRASH. They did not put out the trash(disease). THE vultures and SCAVENGERS (flies) that WE FIND on the scene (bacteria) are CLEANING UP THE TOXINS (Trash) but somehow ARE being MIS IDENTIFIED AS the Cause(Villains). Pharmakia at it best. (Read the virus myth) Viruse are particles that aren't even alive! How in the puck are they going to attack your body?
Be careful with the English Language here - the number one alchemic tool of the deceiver in the world (yes, you are in bondage). The difference and similarity between the terms; microbe,viruses, germs, bacteria, fungus etc.. are being swung around here in such a way that it can't be easily understood and someone is going to get hurt:).
Remember the 3 rules to the truth. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
95% of you will be at stage 3 as soon as your ego lets you.
Argue for your limitations and its truly yours.-wax
Just remember the simple rule on what DV is talking about. Your house is fire. You call the fireman - The police(Western medicine) comes by and see the firemen(specific bacteria) putting it out and decides to arrest the firemen for starting the fire.
Summary. DV is saying -Hey lets examine the facts and UBM is saying "Kill the phunkin firemen."- typical of his people- just kidding :).
I'd just as soon take raw garlic over antibiotics because raw garlic doesn't kill beneficial bacteria but ABs DO.
Which is exactly the point I was making when Big Man brought up the elders' advice to take castor oil and Cod Liver oil.
That our elders were wise enough to understand that equipping our immune system's to naturally fight disease is far more effective than simply attacking a germ.
Same sentiment as the old saying about teaching a man to fish.
What about filthy living conditions causes the body to accumulate acidity and thus make it sick, according to your way of thinking?
It is not MY way of thinking. If you actually read my statements - instead of assuming I'm saying the same thing as DV - you would see that I stated, IF IT IS TRUE that acidity is the primary underlying factor in disease, it would blow apart the entire allopathic approach to medicine. That is fascinating to me.
You know my stance on vaccines. If the acid-alkaline theory is true, then vaccine theory literally goes out the window. Completely fascinating.
And if the acid-alkaline theory is correct, then there is no doubt that filthy living conditions would contribute to acidity.
Most water today is acidic, when proper, clean, natural water should be at least, neutral if not slightly alkaline.
When I read the post, I called DV and asked him to send me the link to the underlying information because I want to read more about it. Rather than dismiss it outright because it runs counter to what Dr. says, I find it completely interesting to explore further.
I'm surprised at your kneejerk reaction, given how open-minded you generally are on other topics.
If Pasteur indeed did recant and his contemporaries discovered such flaws in his theories, the allopathic medical approach becomes one big fraud.
Hey Denmark... would you bone a chick with gonorrhea?
YOU ARE BLAMING THE FLIES FOR THE Trash! THE FLIES ARE THE EFFECT OF THE TRASH.
wow!
Undercover Black Man said...
Hey Denmark... would you bone a chick with gonorrhea?
I wouldn't bone a chick who ate pork.
Hey UBM... would you bone a chick with Smallpox?
http://www.whale.to/a/smallpox_hoax.html
People a gift.
Every answer to every question you had above is in Whale.to . use it before the PTB brings it down. Spend time researching the entire site -it is the real truth for your medical perspective. Kill your fear.
On an unrelated, but interesting note:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/06/us/06abortion.html
Abortion and segregation, I'm sure you'll be interested DV.
We are made up of 90 % bacteria.
What does it portend that the "PTB" are committing significant resources to the scientific study of the matter?
Single cell microscopic organisms (bacteria) are involved in many functions of our entire world (NEITHER GOOD OR BAD).
What role did bacteria play in the origin of cognition?
The human body CAN benefit from a conservative vaccination schedule.
1974 Vac. Schedule
*2 months; DTap (pertussis), TOPV (trivalent oral polio virus)
*4 months: DTaP, TOPV
*6 months: DTaP, TOPV
*1 Year: Measles, TB test
*1-12 years: Rubella, Mumps
*1 1/2 years: DTaP, TOPV
*4-6 years: DTap, TPOV
Recent testing schedules are more agressive;
http:www.cdc.gov?vaccines/recs/schedules/downloads/child/2009/09_0-6yrs_schedule_pr.pdf
Maybe the human body is becoming overwhelmed by our more recent schedule.
Maybe this is what is causing a rise in Autism
Still missing the point...
EVEN IF germ theory is true IT STILL DOES NOT NECESSITATE mandatory vaccination. In fact, per germ theory, MANDATORY VACCINATION MUST CAUSE DISEASE.
Ahhh, what a ripping good day it was! Thanks for the workout, DV. (A little cocoa butter should relieve the heat from those ass blisters.)
Meanwhile, let me drop one final bit of history, to nail home my point. We talked about Aztecs. We talked about Australian Aborigines. Now... let’s talk Eskimos.
White folks’ diseases killed tens of thousands of Eskimos. (Unless DV can prove they were “gunned down” like those 20 million Aztecs. LOL!!)
“Before the arrival of foreigners... [the] Inuit knew no smallpox, measles, influenza, diphtheria, or typhoid fever. They had few colds, little or no tuberculosis, and no venereal disease.” (Soure.)
This is from a 1921 journal article published by the American Geographical Society:
“In 1734 and 1735, 2,000 Greenland Eskimos were carried off by smallpox, and about that time the same plague ravaged the Labrador Eskimos also. Farther west, in the Mackenzie Delta, the population thirty years ago was estimated at 2,000; today it is barely 500.
“Wherever on the American continent the Eskimos have come into contact with Europeans, there we find pneumonia and tuberculosis and various other diseases.”
Yeah boy. “Stress” is a killer.
mills,
Why didn't all the Eskimos die?
^ Pull your panties up, Josh. I'm done for the night.
The same reason everyone doesn't die from vaccinations.
Maybe some had more genetic diversity which enabled them to better adapt to a new illness.
mills,
You sure you're ready for bed? Wouldn't want to give you any nightmares.
UBJ,
Or, some were healthy...
Now explain why a HEALTHY new born needs MANDATORY VACCINATION that must, per germ theory, cause disease?
The point is this. Who cares what causes disease IF THE REAL DEBATE IS WHO CONTROLS HOW YOU FIGHT IT?
So who controls YOUR FIGHT AGAINST DISEASE and how does this align with YOUR STANCE ON MANDATORY VACCINATION, ie, mandatory diseasing?
Undercover Black Man said...
Ahhh, what a ripping good day it was! Thanks for the workout, DV.
LOL.
I like this part when The Plantation Enthusiasts bend over backwards to appear glib.
Let's see UnderCoverBlack Man
1) Aborigines died "of smallpox" when they encountered white men with guns ...
2) The Eskimos died "of smallpox" when they encountered white men with guns ...
3) The Aztecs died of smallpox when they encountered white men with guns ...
4) The American Indians died "of smallpox" when they encountered white men with guns ...
Seems like muufuggas died of everything EXCEPT guns!
If the Nazis had won WWII UB ... the Jews would have died "of Tay Sachs" syndrome.
History is written by the victors.
Tell me ...
If millions of American Indians just drop dead after being exposed to germy Europeans ... why did black people survive?
Why they have to shoot, burn, torture, drown, abort and hang us?
Why we still here?
"well me and UBM in Antarctica with improper clothing would likely land us hypothermia if we survived."
Mahndisaaaa Mahndisaaaa Mahndisaaaa ...
Your thinking couldn't be less agile if you had a club foot.
Please consider the following:
· Germs are already in the body by the billions and don't necessarily have to come from without (although that can sometimes happen)
· Blood is not sterile but can contain many microbial forms
· Acidic terrain, not germs, cause disease
· Germs are pleomorphic, i.e., they can change through many forms (Dr Gaston Naessens identified a microbe undergoing 16 different stages of evolution)
· Virtually all diseases are caused by acidic terrain
· Diseases can be prevented or reversed by increasing the alkalinity of the terrain
· Germs are already in the body by the billions and don't necessarily have to come from without (although that can sometimes happen)
· Virtually all diseases are caused by acidic terrain
· Germs are pleomorphic, i.e., they can change through many forms (Dr Gaston Naessens identified a microbe undergoing 16 different stages of evolution)
· Blood is not sterile but can contain many microbial forms
&
· Germs are already in the body by the billions and don't necessarily have to come from without (although that can sometimes happen)
But since we come into contact with millions of new germs everyday (through contact with money, door handles, shopping carts, etc.) aren't we already exposed to many foriegn bacteria which we may not have evolved to defend?
In a muti-racial society - do we still even need all these vaccines?
Good read, good thread.
Lamont: "Hey Ralo, I see you got yourself a few new threads"
Ralo: "Naw baby, this is the whole spool"
-Sanford & Son
I think DV needs to try to grass fed BEEF and raw milk because animal protein helps develop brain cells.
Hey M, you mean neurons? those are the nerve cells that do the thinking. Actually, that is not scientifically proven. If it was then meat would be the cure for neurological disorders. Neurons develop massively before birth, after that they grow in less amounts. During adolescence They keep stable but become stronger, expand and connect electrically with each other through brain exercises like learning. Let's not mix it with stress or excessive fatigue though, we will get different results.
Protein helps to regenerate muscle tissue. In that case the best source of protein would be raw protein from seeds, fruits, almonds, broccoli, cauliflower. not cooked protein as most "experts" suggest. Raw protein is absorbed directly and your body doesn't have to worry about expelling the unnecessary toxins from meats which I think it is what your body worries most before trying to even create anything new. Also cooked beans, lentils, peas, rice, pasta are a good alternative to meat protein.
The best foods known to improve brain functions are foods rich in omega3 which are found in acai berry and other berries, walnuts, avocado, salmon, hemp, etc.
This is because the brain is mostly composed of fats, good fats though (well, that depends) and omega3 is the best source known. It helps clean the brain vessels and allows the neurons to communicate better with each other.
Just an interesting note about brain cell growth; scientists have found that a synthetic THC (active marijuana ingredient) caused a 40% increase in rats' brain cells. I knew that way before though. I mean, sometimes you don't need science, you just need common sense.
From a personal perspective meat is an indulgence. Not necessary for the human body to survive and too toxic to think its healthy.
But don't take my word for it, I didn't start the whole vegetarian religion...
"Non-violence leads to the highest ethics, which is the goal of all evolution. Until we stop harming all other living beings, we are still savages." Thomas Edison
"The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated."
Mahatma Gandhi
"In their behavior toward creatures, all men are Nazis. Human beings see oppression vividly when they're the victims. Otherwise they victimize blindly and without a thought."
Isaac Bashevis Singer
"For as long as men massacre animals, they will kill each other. Indeed, he who sows the seed of murder and pain cannot reap joy and love."
Pythagoras
Ok, ok... one last one.
"The time will come when men such as I will look upon the murder of animals as they now look on the murder of men."
Leonardo da Vinci
Happy Eating! =)
UBJ,
The same fools that are diversifying your "terrain" (making it more acidic) are also the same fools seeking to control your managed diseasing, ie., vaccination.
While these knuckleheads argue about WHAT CAUSES DISEASING, the real debate is WHO GETS TO CONTROL YOUR DISEASING?
If you are healthy then under this current regime YOU ARE THE THREAT. And your refusal to accept managed diseasing IS ASSERTED TO CREATE FURTHER SPREAD OF DISEASE. This is diabolical and compels one to think of the cause of diseasing AS IN THE HANDS OF DIABOLICAL ACTORS.
2) The Eskimos died "of smallpox" when they encountered white men with guns ...
Yes, Denmark... the pages of history are soaked with the blood of Eskimos slaughtered by white people!!!
The worst part about these countless massacres of Inuit by brutish land-grabbing Europeans is... there is no mention of any of it on the internets! Whitey has effectively whitewashed his murderous history in the Arctic!!
Seriously doe, Denmark, you ended yesterday as you started it... displaying a comical degree of historical ignorance and a tragic lack of good sense.
Fact of the matter is, Europeans didn't make contact with the Inuit in order to genocide 'em and jack their land. It was basically about trade.
In the late 1800s, for example, American whaling ships hired Eskimos as crew, paying them with trade goods such as tobacco, alcohol, iron tools, clothing... and firearms.
Yeah, DV, Whitey didn't gun down the Eskimos. Whitey sold guns to the Eskimos! Which ironically created the "condition" by which more white people came into contact with more Eskimos, inadvertently spreading more disease:
"As firearms had made it easier for Inuit to hunt seals, fur-trade began to boom and the Hudson's Bay Company (... still Canada's largest department stores chain today) opened new Northern trading posts. This was the beginning of the [white] presence in the North.
"With the growth of the fur-trade came Catholic and Anglican missionaries who brought major cultural changes (practices such as polygamy and infanticide were forbidden) and introduced literacy (e.g. the Inuit syllabary) and medical assistance (smallpox, measles, syphilis and alcoholism were devastating communities which were in contact with the [whites])."
(Source.)
DV said:
"If millions of American Indians just drop dead after being exposed to germy Europeans ... why did black people survive?"
Because Africans had a higher level of resistance for numerous reasons -
1. I think it's partly due to their high genetic variation which enabled them to adapt to their new environment in North America and the Caribbean. Whereas Africans have the founder, the genetic variation in Native Americans is a subtype of the Asian variation.
2. Because Native Americans had not been exposed to as many diseases as Europeans or even Africans so for their systems to develop immunity whereas smallpox had been in Africa prior to European arrival.
3. Most importantly:
"Observations of smallpox-typical skin rashes on Egyptian mummies dating from 1100 to 1580 B.C. (1–3) gave early credibility to theories that ancient Egypt was an early (and perhaps the earliest) smallpox endemic region."
My guess is that maybe by the time the Egyptian civilisations southwards and then eastwards conquering and being conquered by other Africans, they were already carrying a smallpox resistant gene.
To backup my guess:
"Diversification of Alastrim minor.The smallpox history/VARV topology-based analyses show that the divergence of alastrim minor and West African variola began at least 800 years ago (Table 2 and SI Table 4), predating the previous hypothesis that this divergence coincides with the beginning of the slave trade. Under the more ancient origin hypothesis, this divergence could have occurred after a speciation event in either the New World (based on the calibration from the earliest smallpox historic records; Fig. 3 A) or West Africa (based on the calibration from the South African smallpox historic records; Fig. 3 B). These scenarios would suggest that there were unidentified variola minor/alastrim isolates that existed in either Africa or the New World much earlier than the discovery of alastrim minor (P-II); thus, this taxon has a longer history than has been described."
"My guess is that maybe by the time the Egyptian civilisations southwards and then eastwards"
*I meant to include westwards
If millions of American Indians just drop dead after being exposed to germy Europeans ... why did black people survive?
My guess -- only a guess -- is that livestock animals are somehow involved. Living in proximity to livestock for many generations is what gave rise to some diseases... as well as giving rise to resistance to certain diseases.
What do the Aztecs, the Aborigines and the Eskimos have in common... beside the fact they started dropping like flies when exposed to white folks' diseases?
Those cultures had no domestic livestock. They were hunter-gatherer societies.
UBJ said
"In a muti-racial society - do we still even need all these vaccines?"
I'd rephrase the question to: does living in a multi-racial society increase enhance/diminish resistance to specific disease and/or does it enhance/diminish susceptibility to specific diseases (and their mutations)? And what role does genetic variation play?
It's an interesting subject worth exploring if, for example, one is looking at HIV and its spread among different groups and how genetic variation increases the chances of transmission of a specific strain of the virus specific to a particular group.
@ TD - So being FORCED to acquire healthcare is just a means to ensure that everyone must take part in a Global System of Pharma Supremacy?
Ces, I meant what I said. And meat isn't an indulgence; it's a necessity for most! I read that the human brain didn't start evolving to a higher level until we started consuming animal proteins. Besides that; everything is alive. Plants are alive and killing plants for food seems no less immoral than killing animals for food.
Animal proteins can cure or ameliorate many disease states in humans; provided the meat is fresh and not irradiated etc.
As to marijuana, I am well aware of its wonderful benefits. But just like anything else, in excess it can cause problems; more or less with mood.
UBJ,
What I'm saying is that IF ONE IS HEALTHY then FORCED health care is self-evidently nonsensical and therefore must represent something quite diabolical.
And when you peel back the layers and dismiss this silly conversation about WHAT CAUSES DISEASE and instead focus on WHO CONTROLS YOUR HEALTH then you will recognize that IF YOU ARE HEALTHY then YOU ARE THE THREAT.
^^^ And furthermore, those attempting to control your health by managing your diseasing ARE ALSO THOSE WORKING feverishly TO DIVERSIFY YOUR "TERRAIN" (make it more acidic).
The thing with germ theory is that IT CAN'T ONLY APPLY TO MICROORGANISMS. Meaning, we could have never gotten here if microbes OUT-EVOLVED humans. Now, the liberal-minded fellow will say we are "equal." Microbes kill us and we kill microbes. Some more extremist-minded fellows will say microbes are CONSTANTLY EVOLVING and therefore represent a perpetual existential crisis and therefore we must follow the protocol of those that are attempting to stop this calamity.
But we know that HEALTH is the only defense.
Therefore, the fundamental question arises.
Why do we disease (vaccinate) a healthy child right from the get-go?
Because IF YOU ARE HEALTHY, YOU ARE THE THREAT.
@ TD - But if everyone was programmed (educated) to believe all the hype from birth - who's to tell them/us they/we are wrong?
If we have just been repeating false memes for so long - who is to ever know?
"Because IF YOU ARE HEALTHY, YOU ARE THE THREAT."
Thordaddy, can you break that one down?
TD,
Imma be honest; I laughed real hard at the way your comment makes a startling, unintelligible leap from scientific to socio-cultural discourse it borders on being worthy of an Ig Nobel Prize.
But on a second read, I think it might be worth re-thinking your treatise on microbes and acidic terrain. Bacteria are essential for life on earth so its not a question of humans out-evolving anything, but how that which is key to human survival and evolution can also be a threat to that survival when an environment or a body is unhealthy.
Konwomyn,
In a free country the question is WHO CONTROLS ONE'S HEALTH.
Your paradigm tries to ride the fence, but ultimately,it can't.
If YOU are healthy then how does Germ Theory NECESSITATE YOUR DISEASING, i.e., your vacinnation?
And those who are diversifying your "terrain," are they doing it to your benefit?
And how does that jive with Germ Theory?
@ TD - Going back to SeeNew's comment about cognition (2/09 8:35) - is Big Pharma involved in some sort of plan to make us all fall in line and follow orders?
Is it all part of some plan to make us all part of The Hive?
Is a forced vaccination plan all part of "The Mark of the Beast"?
UBJ,
In a radically autonomizing society, not knowing is both liberating and torturous. This is exactly how the more radically autonomous among us WILL have it. They AIM to diversify your "terrain" because it liberates them and tortures you. Diversifying your "terrain" (your environment) is by definition the act of introducing evermore "unknowns" into the mix. These are microbes and macrobes. These are germ theory and evolutionary theory. These are vaccinations and healthcare.
THE ONLY QUESTION IS WHO GETS TO CONTROL IT ALL???
If someone WANTS TO MANAGE YOUR HEALTHCARE,
the assumption is that YOU ARE UNHEALTHY.
If you are healthy, YOU DON'T NEED CARE...
Unless, that is...
There are very savy evolutionary micro-warriors ACTIVELY BATTLING FOR SUPREMACY in the game of life.
Again, how does vaccinating (diseasing one's self) ready
you against these micro-warriors THAT GOOD HEALTH WOULDN'T DO? Afterall, YOU ARE NOT INFECTED, but are being COMPELLED TO INFECT YOURSELF.
Thordaddy
You misread me. I'm not offering a paradigm, but offering a suggestion as to how you might apply microbial pathogenicity to your thinking on society. The way you use the science as a metaphor seems to misunderstand a few things:
a. there is good bacteria and bad bacteria; within your body from your mouth to your colon are trillions of bacteria neccessary for the digestive process of food to take place - how one can speak of being outevolved is puzzling, to me.
b. humans are not in competition with bacteria - hence the suggested re-phrasing in my comment.
c. bio-diversity in organisms does not mean the same as cultural diversity e.g. microbial diversity is not the same as a diverse society, microbial diversity tells us more about sustainability of life; in genetics it tells how different organisms evolved whereas, for you cultural diversity means death of a society.
If I had to think of society in terms of microbial pathogenecity; my approach would be radically different from yours, as you know, and I wouldn't make the leap without setting out some ideological parameters and learning more about how microbial organisms work within a specific area rather than a universalist approach.
Or else pay a $912 penalty like in Mass..
UBJ,
I don't posit any grand conspiracy because at the end the day every cat is out for his own nine lives.
Vaccinations are just one side of the coin AND THEY MAY OR MAY NOT BETTER PREPARE AN IMMUNE SYSTEM TO RESPOND TO A NOVEL VIRUS.
Big Pharma is also in the business of performance enhancement technologies. But our politicians have somehow made themselves gatekeepers to these ENHANCEMENT TECHNOLOGIES.
The fact is that in the proper order of things I SHOULD BE ABLE TO REJECT INFECTION AND PURSUE PERFORMACE ENHANCEMENT.
Konwomyn,
Whatever partakes at the micro must be in coherence with the macro.
If there are indeed micro-warriors CAUSING us particular disease (logical paths to death) then it would be silly to see this as anything other than a REPLICATION OF OUR MACRO-REALITY. It would be silly to see these micro-warriors as anything other than active agents of death. Not ALL of them of course, but that is irrelevant as we cannot tell the difference. All we can see is growing DIVERSITY.
This, per evolutionary and germ theory, represents a deleterious environment for most all less the most evolved of life forms.
Meaning, when THEY say, "Diversity is OUR strength," THEY are speaking of themselves. They are speaking of the most radically autonomous. The very creature most adapted to absolute diversity.
@ Ugly - "So being FORCED to acquire healthcare is just a means to ensure that everyone must take part in a Global System of Pharma Supremacy?"
The answer is yes, yes, and yes. That is how those boys play chess. IG farben mugga fugga.
ps- Just read your profile. Fyi- I am an engineering grad from Lamar University in Beaumont! :) I knew that the good vibes were coming from the Golden triangle area.
b. humans are not in competition with bacteria
How do you know?
Wax, upthread you wrote;
Single cell microscopic organisms (bacteria) are involved in many functions of our entire world (NEITHER GOOD OR BAD).
What role did bacteria play in the origin of cognition?
CNu:
How do you know?
Because of mutualism; a system of co-operation between species. In your link fermentation is a form of theft of energy in cancer, but that is not neccessarily always the case. "For example plant polysaccharides that are not digestible by humans are the main substrates for microbial growth in the colon, whereas butyrate and other products of microbial fermentation are important energy sources for the host."
Suppose - for discussion's sake - that the anthropocosm is indeed a bacterial construct.
Aren't there myriad bacterial formations distinctively different from and in competition with the anthropocosm?
Aren't there in fact bacterial constructs whose unopposed action would convert the biosphere into something radically different than the one in which we flourish?
What comprises the physical substrate for cognition/awareness in the anthropocosmic microbiome?
"What comprises the physical substrate for cognition/awareness in the anthropocosmic microbiome?"
Sheet, this is a loaded question if I ever saw one. The answer is who the fuck knows? Likely something subtle or not easily tangible like thought waves or something. If you look at the brain as a collection of matter and electrical impulses, cognition might be due to a fluxuation in one of the EM fields. I truly have no idea and think the question is worth discussing.
Ok. But that's based on a premise that survival is based on competition and not on symbiosis. From that perspective, the continuity of multiple and complex forms of bacteria is ensured by the relationships between organisms rather than struggling for survival in total isolation or in a hierarchical fashion.
Yes "there are bacterial constructs whose unopposed action..." But an oppositional response would then be a form of defensive mutualism where organisms under threat form partnerships to ensure their survival and maintain the earth, as is.
The last qsn - that would depend on which has continually developed strategic relationships with other substrates, as the most appropriate response to the changes in its environment and as a means to ensure continuity.
Does yeast operate in this way?
Sheet, this is a loaded question if I ever saw one. The answer is who the fuck knows?
the wax posted some very expansive material related to this topic on this thread here. in addition, on this thread and others, the wax has repeatedly endorsed (promoted) the views expressed at this web site here.
while I can see how the former relates to the latter given some mighty, mighty leaps of faith - there are some key interstitial questions begged in going from the premises broached on "anonymous is school" - to the premise of this discussion thread "hot wax takes fek to school" - and from there - to the premises of the anti-allopathy website's material.
I'm simply asking a few of these basic, interstitial questions....,
Ok. But that's based on a premise that survival is based on competition and not on symbiosis.
What is the premise of this discussion thread KW?
Isn't it all about dietary terraforming the terrain of the anthroposcosmic microbiome to make it more alkaline than acidic?
Other than as a matter of scale, how is that substantively different from the ideas broached in the Oxygen Wars in which nitrogen loving and oxygen loving bacteria via for control of the terrestrial macrobiome?
From that perspective, the continuity of multiple and complex forms of bacteria is ensured by the relationships between organisms rather than struggling for survival in total isolation or in a hierarchical fashion.
The question of the "relationships between organisms" boils down to the question of agency, doesn't it?
The question of agency boils down to "from whence does the "cognition" the intentionality emanate"?
Doesn't it?
The last qsn - that would depend on which has continually developed strategic relationships with other substrates, as the most appropriate response to the changes in its environment and as a means to ensure continuity. Does yeast operate in this way?
you already know the answer to that question.
Yes... Per evolutionary theory, bacteria MUST contain the potential for "cognition." In fact, all the biota MUST contain the "material stuff" that has potential to evolve into "cognition" as IS REQUIRED BY DESCENT. This evolutionary necessity GOES EVEN FURTHER in its implication of "cognition" in all living things with the assertion of "modification."
Descent with modification ASSERTS the "material stuff" for the genesis of "cognition" in all of the biota AND the ability to manipulate this "material stuff" and hence direct evolution.
If we are to accept modern evolutionary theory and its fundamental assertions then we instantly recognize that konwomyn and M Rigmaiden are career oriented in their belief of MET whereas C Nulan is oriented towards the singularity. He likes MET because IT IS SUBJECT TO MODIFICATION. Further, other "lower" but potentially cognitive life forms ARE MODIFIABLE.
When THEY say, "DIVERSITY is OUR strength," they mean it is YOUR weakness. You do not know as creators of DIVERSITY they can control your evolution. This diversity is being manipulated AT ALL LEVELS MICRO TO MACRO AND BEYOND. Craig knows this. He partake in this...
But the question still remains. WHO gets to CONTROL ONE'S EVOLUTION?
Under the modern evolutionary paradigm is the simple observation that the healthy are the strong and the intelligently healthy are the really strong. Therefore, a ruthless radical autonomist would maximize his autonomy by being intelligently healthy AND relegating the competition to unhealthy status.
In between are the intuitively healthy serving as the main threat to the intelligently healthy and subject to the constant conformity and consensus of the unhealthy TO GET INFECTED.
In this "terrain" you have to guard your health like you would guard your kids, lady and money. Your strength is under constant threat from a myriad of "cognitive" agents.
Ok. You've made some prety good points I can't disagree with. What I would ask is whether you believe that once a parasitic mircrobial community colonizes its host change is impossible? Like the changing relationship between the hookworm and human beings (it's only an abstract, can't access full text anywhere.) or bacteria in the oral cavity?
What I would ask is whether you believe that once a parasitic mircrobial community colonizes its host change is impossible?
KW,
You know as well as I do that that question can only be given serious consideration on a case-by-case basis - one which takes into consideration the specific "nature" of the parasite/host/symbionts involved.
Waxing expansive for just a moment. Now knowing the complex microbiomic nature of the human organism, doesn't it seem very peculiar to even pretend to have to peer off into the insubstantial "aether" in search of non-human intelligence?
I knew that's where you were going C Nulan.
Where exactly is that Big Man?
Well it has already been shown that microbes have agendas, particularly the toxoplamosis. It can change a rat from hating the smell and fearing the smell of cats to actively seeking cats out so that toxoplasmosis can infect their brains.
These notions were explored in childhood books by Madeline L'Engle if I recall. Ultimately we are an accumulation of many microbes, often with differing agendas and perhaps their warring inside of us causes cognition. Otherwise, I have no idea what is the origin of cognition. And I haven't seen anything else that even satisfactorily broaches the topic without getting into psuedoscientific declarations that have no basis in reality.
Cnulan
Here:
"Waxing expansive for just a moment. Now knowing the complex microbiomic nature of the human organism, doesn't it seem very peculiar to even pretend to have to peer off into the insubstantial "aether" in search of non-human intelligence?"
I have an idea about where you're going from there, but I wouldn't want to speculate.
Otherwise, I have no idea what is the origin of cognition. And I haven't seen anything else that even satisfactorily broaches the topic without getting into psuedoscientific declarations that have no basis in reality.
You haven't looked hard enough.
But then, you weren't waxing expansive with broad and largely unsubstantiated claims that made ole DeVil's pointy little head explode in uncritical excitement, amazement, and enthusiasm....,
I have an idea about where you're going from there, but I wouldn't want to speculate.
lol..,
don't get scurred now Big Man.
"Waxing expansive for just a moment. Now knowing the complex microbiomic nature of the human organism, doesn't it seem very peculiar to even pretend to have to peer off into the insubstantial "aether" in search of non-human intelligence"
To my mind you seem to be questioning either of three things: the concept of a God in Heaven who created all or the belief in extra-terrestrials or your arch-nemesis Lyndon LaRouche and his cult.
KW not scurred...., ;^)
to all but the most suggestible, the dubiousness of the larooshian ouevre very plainly speaks for itself.
as for the other gaseous stuff, no need to go heels on them either.
my point is very simply that the quest for ancient, effectively eternal, and comparatively vast non-human intelligence is plainly evident all around us.
its material substrate, constructive activities, and intentionality are all subject to objective verification.
one need only pay attention and do the work....,
Nah Konwomyn,
He is saying we "operate" in a post-Darwinian paradigm where MODIFICATION implies INTELLIGENTLY-DIRECTED evolution.
He is saying in a post-Darwinian paradigm the "lowest" lifeforms MUST HAVE THE STUFF OF COGNITION.
"to all but the most suggestible, the dubiousness of the larooshian ouevre very plainly speaks for itself."
ROFLMBAO! Now that is funny! As to the apparent nature of cognition of beings other than humans, sure that is apparent. But that doesn't answer the question you posed above which is what is the material substrate under which consciousness emerged, so what is it? I've taken a few guesses but I don't think the answer is absolute...
Nah I ain't skurrred, this is school.
IMO it's quite fascinating to think of bacteria as cognitive beings - where humans fail to satisfy their digestive needs; bacteria can manipulate the biological makeup of plants and animals so they may be satisfied.
A look at any of the links upthread shows that bacteria have a high level of cognitive and computational ability and adaptability. I'd never thought of connecting the dots in this way, but it makes some sense.
To answer the qsn "what is the material substrate under which consciousness emerged" might begin with looking at bacteria and the chemical processes that go on in the human brain and those of its evolutionary predecessors (if y'swing that way). In some ways, it is also connected to the 'God question,' or would it be a 'God v bacteria qsn' because you're looking for a historical and scientific process of how consciousness came to be.
Well, KW, bacteria can actually communicate like we do. They have their own language among specific strains and they have a universal language as well that they can use to interface with other beings. Usually this occurs via chemical signaling but since the signaling involves EM fields and their fluxuations s at a fundamental level, perhaps coupling bacteria consciousness to EM fields is not so far fetched after all, in terms of the substrate question... See this lecture by Dr. Bonnie Bassler.
Also, thinking about the material substrate and consciousness puts a different spin on that Le Pasteur quote, "the microbe is nothing, terrain is everything".
"They have their own language among specific strains and they have a universal language as well that they can use to interface with other beings."
name an organism that cannot do that?
Busy teaching the little boy how to fry chicken, so it'll be a while before I can get back to this in earnest, but I'll come back to this with a little additional grist for the mill.
Thanks for the stimulating and constructive repartee!
LOL! Make sure he doesn't burn down the house. I'm off to bed myself so will be back in some hours.
Likewise, thank you for the thought-provoking dialogue.
...peace
For all shit DV starts - these threads are actually better than school.
yes that man can start some shit and yes it is better than school!
Yeah CNulan that's where I figured you were going.
Been here long enough to know the road signs. Carry on, that's no my cup of tea.
Post a Comment