Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
GeneralCardiologyVisionDentistryPharmacyLaboratoryNutritionAlternative
Diseases and Disorders
AIDSAlzheimer'sArthritisAsthmaCancerBreast CancerDiabetesEpilepsyGlaucomaHepatitisHerpesLupusProstate BPHProstate CancerProstatitisSinusitisTinnitus

Medical Forum / General / Alternative / May 2008

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

There's a crowd of reasons we get the flu in winter

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
rpautrey2 - 09 Feb 2008 16:18 GMT
There's a crowd of reasons we get the flu in winter
By Kim Painter
USA TODAY
01-13-2008

If it's mid-January (and it is), it must be flu season.
But why do winter and the flu go together? The one-word explanation
most people have heard: crowding.

That is, in winter people crowd together inside, providing a perfect
opportunity for flu viruses and other respiratory infections to
spread. But scientists and common-sense thinkers alike have been
questioning the so-called crowding theory for years.

"We have schools in May and June, and people do get together at movie
theaters in the summer," says Peter Palese, chairman of the
microbiology department at Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York.
"Crowding alone doesn't explain it."

Alternative theories abound. Some center on how the human body
responds to decreased sunlight -- by making less of the hormone
melatonin or vitamin D, for example, both of which might affect
immunity.

Another theory is that drier, colder air is key. A recent study by
Palese and his colleagues gave the strongest support yet to that idea.
The scientists exposed guinea pigs to flu viruses and found they
easily infected one another in cool, dry air but couldn't spread the
flu at all at 30 degrees Celsius (86 F).

So, should we all just turn our houses (and nursing homes and schools)
into saunas and invite in the neighbors?

No. For one thing, what's bad for the flu virus may be perfect for
other microbes: Molds and bacteria would be delighted to take up
residence in overheated, highly humidified buildings, Palese says. "We
have to be very careful about any sort of public health
recommendation," he says.

Meanwhile, health experts say that even if crowding is not the primary
cause of seasonal flu patterns, it still plays a role in spreading flu
when it is afoot. Other illnesses, including the common cold, also
love a crowd. That's true even though the microbes that cause various
illnesses spread in different ways, with common cold viruses thriving
on direct contact, like hand-shaking, but flu viruses spreading mostly
through droplets in the air.

In fact, even before people knew about viruses and bacteria, they
understood that certain illnesses -- from colds and flus to TB and
smallpox -- spread from person to person, and called them "crowding
diseases," says Howard Markel, director of the Center for the History
of Medicine at the University of Michigan.

"It's common sense that the more crowded a situation is, the more at
risk you are," Markel says.

"Crowding is bad, independent of everything else," says Dean Erdman, a
respiratory-virus researcher at the federal Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention.

Cold researcher Ronald Turner of the University of Virginia agrees:
"At the extreme, if you avoid all contact with other individuals, you
won't get infected."

But is a child more likely to get sick in a classroom of 30 children
than a classroom of 20? Is there an ideal distance to maintain between
yourself and others in a crowd? Could a severe flu pandemic be slowed
by shutting down schools and workplaces and prohibiting other public
gatherings?

Answers to such questions are sparse and often based on conjecture.
But interest in the answers is growing as health experts plan for
pandemic flu and other emerging infections.

One thing researchers do know, Erdman says, is that some germs are
especially well-adapted to crowded conditions. Among them are
adenoviruses, which often cause outbreaks of respiratory illnesses
among military recruits. One apparently nasty strain is implicated in
recent severe cases of the so-called boot camp flu.

But the most promising potential solution, Erdman says, isn't private
rooms for recruits; it's a vaccine the military hopes to reintroduce
soon. Likewise, the best way to avoid garden-variety influenza is to
get a flu vaccine, Palese says.

There's no vaccine for the cold, but -- short of locking yourself in a
closet -- Turner says that "washing your hands continues to be the best
thing we have to offer."

Find this article at:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/painter/2008-01-13-winter-flu-crowds_N.htm

Copyright 2008 USA TODAY, a division of Gannett Co. Inc.
drceephd@insightbb.com - 09 Feb 2008 17:36 GMT
> There's a crowd of reasons we get the flu in winter
> By Kim Painter
> USA TODAY
> 01-13-2008

> There's no vaccine for the cold, but -- short of locking yourself in a
> closet -- Turner says that "washing your hands continues to be the best
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>
> Copyright 2008 USA TODAY, a division of Gannett Co. Inc.

Very nice PA.  However, the truth is that a cold is a "healing"
response on the part of a "vital" organism to an inner "toxic load".
The common cold is a "Cure" for inner toxicity.  The same is true for
the flu, except that the flu is a more intense inner house cleaning
event.  The need for  the house cleaning, determined by the body's
"inate intelligence", is so great that you will be forced to go to
bed, rest, and not eat.  Once your fever is gone, your aches will
disappear, your appetite will return, and you can get up out of your
sickbed to poison and pollute your body all over again.

DrCee
An Orthopathic dis-ease proponent.
D. C. Sessions - 09 Feb 2008 18:09 GMT
> Very nice PA.  However, the truth is that a cold is a "healing"
> response on the part of a "vital" organism to an inner "toxic load".
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> disappear, your appetite will return, and you can get up out of your
> sickbed to poison and pollute your body all over again.

So what were the Huron so in need of "curing" that they
needed smallpox, measles, etc?  And why did these conditions
only appear following indirect contact with Europeans?

That's some "cure" that depopulated the Western Hemisphere
by 75%-90% in the two centuries following Columbus.

| Bogus as it might seem, people, this really is a deliverable       |
| e-mail address.  Of course, there isn't REALLY a lumber cartel.    |
| There isn't really a Santa Claus, but try www.santaclaus.com.      |
+--------------- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> --------------+
whrlwnd2@webtv.net - 10 Feb 2008 16:57 GMT
From: dcs@lumbercartel.com (D. C. Sessions)
In message
<ad414e16-5772-45e6-b280-34dc34cd56a9@1g2000hsl.googlegroups.com>,
drceephd@insightbb.com wrote:

<Very nice PA.  However, the truth is that a cold is a "healing"
response on the part of a "vital" organism to an inner "toxic load". The
common cold is a "Cure" for inner toxicity.  The same is true for the
flu, except that the flu is a more intense inner house cleaning event.
 The need for  the house cleaning, determined by the body's "inate
intelligence", is so great that you will be forced to go to bed, rest,
and not eat.  Once your fever is gone, your aches will disappear, your
appetite will return, and you can get up out of your sickbed to poison
and pollute your body all over again.>

<So what were the Huron so in need of "curing" that they needed
smallpox, measles, etc? And why did these conditions only appear
following indirect contact with Europeans?
That's some "cure" that depopulated the Western Hemisphere by 75%-90% in
the two centuries following Columbus.
| Bogus as it might seem, people, this really is a deliverable    
  | | e-mail address. Of course, there isn't REALLY a lumber cartel.
  | | There isn't really a Santa Claus, but try www.santaclaus.com.
    | +--------------- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com>
--------------+>

<whrlwnd>
<Two things. My first point, if the excretionary systems are clear and
free flowing, then symptoms of any viral infection will be far less
severe. Second point, Cold and flu 'symptoms' are indeed the bodies
natural means to remove viral toxins.
  The body filters toxins in the liver, kidneys, lymph nodes, and sweat
glands. Toxins are removed via the bowel, bladder, lungs, and sweat.
When any viral toxin is introduced to the body (like any organism, they
consume then create waste, this waste is toxic and poisonous) the body
will naturally try and expel these toxins by any and all routes
possible. Hense, diarrhia from the bowel, increased urinary discharge,
the lymph system through the lungs, and increased sweating. The body
expels alot of water during this period of detoxing so water intake is
very important. Furthermore, the symptoms of vomitting and mucous
buildup in the nose is the bodies natural way of removing any more of
the offending organism/irritant from the body. Aches and pains and
generally feeling like crap is the bodies way of making you conserve
energy by rest and sleep.
  My first point above, if all the excretionary systems of the body are
kept clean and free flowing then symptoms will be less severe. Like most
people in todays modern age, this is not the case. All routes of
detoxification are sluggish and overloaded. The allopath, because he
treats symptoms, makes this situation worse rather than better. John
Wayne had 40 pounds of fecid matter empacted in his bowels and a nine
inch diameter colon when he died.
  As far as the Huron are concerned, examining a medicine man's
protocol at that time might be in order as to why it failed so
misserably. I do know dancing around fires, smoking or imbibing
halucinogens, and making pictures in the sand (and this is for the witch
doctor not the patient!) won't do much for smallpox or measles. They may
have screwed-up and done something allopathic.>
<whrlwnd>
D. C. Sessions - 17 Feb 2008 17:16 GMT
> From: dcs@lumbercartel.com (D. C. Sessions)
I
> > So what were the Huron so in need of "curing" that they needed
> > smallpox, measles, etc? And why did these conditions only appear
> > following indirect contact with Europeans?
> > <Two things. My first point, if the excretionary systems are clear and

> free flowing, then symptoms of any viral infection will be far less
> severe. Second point, Cold and flu 'symptoms' are indeed the bodies
> natural means to remove viral toxins.

You're jumping into an exchange with Cee, who denies that
viruses and bacteria cause disease, which was the point of
my question.  Since you accept that microbes can be the
cause of infectious disease, there's no point in pursuing
the question.

| The most important exclamation in science isn't "Eureka!" |
|    The most important exclamation is "What the BLEEP?"    |
+---------- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> ----------+
whrlwnd2@webtv.net - 17 Feb 2008 18:45 GMT
From: dcs@lumbercartel.com (D. C. Sessions)
In message
<23712-47AF2CEF-366@storefull-3178.bay.webtv.net>, whrlwnd2@webtv.net
wrote:
From: dcs@lumbercartel.com (D. C. Sessions)
I

So what were the Huron so in need of "curing" that they needed smallpox,
measles, etc? And why did these conditions only appear following
indirect contact with Europeans?

<Two things. My first point, if the excretionary systems are clear and
free flowing, then symptoms of any viral infection will be far less
severe. Second point, Cold and flu 'symptoms' are indeed the bodies
natural means to remove viral toxins.>

You're jumping into an exchange with Cee, who denies that viruses and
bacteria cause disease, which was the point of my question. Since you
accept that microbes can be the cause of infectious disease, there's no
point in pursuing the question.

<I have alot of respect or Dr Cee, and agree with him far more than I
agree with you. As far as where bacteria and viruses originate and
mutate could very well be the unclean toxic environment of the human
gut. Microbes are not really the 'cause' of disease. Toxic overload and
an overtaxed excretionary system was my point, and the cleaner the body
is, the better. Orthopathy teaches good hygiene, inside and out, which I
agree wholeheartedly with. Allopathy on the other hand totally
disregards toxic overload and incorporates more toxic materials as
protocols for disease. Like throwing gasoline on a fire.
  As far as the Huron are concerned, I did some digging as to the
protocols used to treat the smallpox. The Europeans brought allopathy
with them. Blood letting was in widespread use at the time. Alot good
that did huh? The indians would have been better off not listening to
allopaths.>
D. C. Sessions - 17 Feb 2008 19:12 GMT
Mangled quotations repaired.

> From: dcs@lumbercartel.com (D. C. Sessions)
> > In message <23712-47AF2CEF-366@storefull-3178.bay.webtv.net>, whrlwnd2@webtv.net wrote:
> > > From: dcs@lumbercartel.com (D. C. Sessions)

> > > > So what were the Huron so in need of "curing" that they needed smallpox,
> > > > measles, etc? And why did these conditions only appear following
> > > > indirect contact with Europeans?

> > > Two things. My first point, if the excretionary systems are clear and
> > > free flowing, then symptoms of any viral infection will be far less
> > > severe. Second point, Cold and flu 'symptoms' are indeed the bodies
> > > natural means to remove viral toxins.>

> > You're jumping into an exchange with Cee, who denies that viruses and
> > bacteria cause disease, which was the point of my question. Since you
> > accept that microbes can be the cause of infectious disease, there's no
> > point in pursuing the question.

> I have alot of respect or Dr Cee, and agree with him far more than I
> agree with you. As far as where bacteria and viruses originate and
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> disregards toxic overload and incorporates more toxic materials as
> protocols for disease. Like throwing gasoline on a fire.

Fine -- so we're back to what changed with the Huron, who
DID NOT PRACTICE "ALLOPATHY."  So please don't change the subject.

>    As far as the Huron are concerned, I did some digging as to the
> protocols used to treat the smallpox. The Europeans brought allopathy
> with them. Blood letting was in widespread use at the time. Alot good
> that did huh? The indians would have been better off not listening to
> allopaths.

Except that those protocols weren't available to the Huron [1].
They continued to use the same traditional healing practices that
they had used for centuries -- and yet they started dying like flies,
both those who accepted baptism (the only thing the Jesuits brought
to the scene) and those who didn't.

So what changed?  Why did they suddenly have diseases they'd never
had before that killed them in windrows?

[1] Or, with very few exceptions, any of the other natives.  Who
   nonetheless died in vast numbers of diseases never before seen
   despite no change in diet, environment, etc.

| The most important exclamation in science isn't "Eureka!" |
|    The most important exclamation is "What the BLEEP?"    |
+---------- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> ----------+
D. C. Sessions - 17 Feb 2008 17:18 GMT
>> Very nice PA.  However, the truth is that a cold is a "healing"
>> response on the part of a "vital" organism to an inner "toxic load".
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
> That's some "cure" that depopulated the Western Hemisphere
> by 75%-90% in the two centuries following Columbus.

<cricket chirps>

Once again demonstrating that being polite and respectful
on MHA just doesn't get you anywhere.

| The most important exclamation in science isn't "Eureka!" |
|    The most important exclamation is "What the BLEEP?"    |
+---------- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> ----------+
drceephd@insightbb.com - 18 Feb 2008 01:31 GMT
> In message <bs6185-2bc....@news.lumbercartel.com>, D. C. Sessions wrote:

> > So what were the Huron so in need of "curing" that they
> > needed smallpox, measles, etc?  And why did these conditions
> > only appear following indirect contact with Europeans?
>
> > That's some "cure" that depopulated the Western Hemisphere
> > by 75%-90% in the two centuries following Columbus.

I have to disagree with DC.

The Indian's way of life was being destroyed.  The Indian was
subjected to stress, malnutrition, and most importantly "lead"
poisoning.  In all likelyhood the "medicine" of the white man would
have been "imported" into the Indian lifestyle.  You know, bleeding,
mercury pills, strychnine, arsenic, and so on would have been taken.

The fundamental truth is that the germ theory of disease is false.
Contagion is a deceit.  Bacteria, a living organism, does not and
cannot infect a healthy human.  The virus, an entity which can exist
only within a living cell and is always dead outside the cell, cannot
come back to life and infect any living thing.

The truth to the question about the Huron and other native Americans
cannot be answered  by the allopathic lies of bacteria , viruses, and
contagion because the germ theory of disease is scientifically
invalid.  This, of course, means that our disgusting practice of
injecting our children and ourselves with foul smelling potions of
rotting monkey kidneys, the refinement of rotten eggs, and mercury
cannot possibly be "safe and effective."

DrCee
Not a member of the church of modern medicine.
D. C. Sessions - 18 Feb 2008 02:08 GMT
>> In message <bs6185-2bc....@news.lumbercartel.com>, D. C. Sessions wrote:
>
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>
> I have to disagree with DC.

You disagree with a question?  You disagree that the population
died?  You disagree that the illnesses that they died of were
recognizably measles, whooping cough, and smallpox?

> The Indian's way of life was being destroyed.  The Indian was
> subjected to stress, malnutrition, and most importantly "lead"
> poisoning.  In all likelyhood the "medicine" of the white man would
> have been "imported" into the Indian lifestyle.  You know, bleeding,
> mercury pills, strychnine, arsenic, and so on would have been taken.

Aside from demonstrating your utter ignorance of history, this
is about what I would expect: making up the facts to fit the theory.
Problem is, the Huron didn't have any European medicine, their
lifestyle was the same as it had been for centuries, and their
contact with Europeans was through a handful of Jesuit missionaries
whose only answer to disease was baptism.

The ones who were baptized and the ones who rejected it died just
the same -- including villages where the Jesuits never visited.

The closest European settlements were weeks travel away.

Of course, they're not nearly as extreme an example as the Mandan.
First European contact was 1738, with no Europeans closer than halfway
across the continent.  By 1838, there were less than 100 of them
left.  The Sioux took over their territory long before the mountain
men came into the area -- and took up living much as the natives
did.

> The fundamental truth is that the germ theory of disease is false.
> Contagion is a deceit.  Bacteria, a living organism, does not and
> cannot infect a healthy human.  The virus, an entity which can exist
> only within a living cell and is always dead outside the cell, cannot
> come back to life and infect any living thing.

So tell us again what happened to the population of the Americas in
the two centuries after Columbus.  Only a few percent of them had
any contact with Europeans at all, but more than three-quarters died
of diseases that they had never encountered before.

> The truth to the question about the Huron and other native Americans
> cannot be answered  by the allopathic lies of bacteria , viruses, and
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> rotting monkey kidneys, the refinement of rotten eggs, and mercury
> cannot possibly be "safe and effective."

So what did kill them?  You're real big on telling us how STOOPID
the idea of contagious disease is, but you don't have any explanations
other than "I can't HEAR you" for historical events.

| The most important exclamation in science isn't "Eureka!" |
|    The most important exclamation is "What the BLEEP?"    |
+---------- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> ----------+
drceephd@insightbb.com - 18 Feb 2008 16:28 GMT
> In message <ea958eac-3478-466d-aa4b-

Tell us, oh great seer, why did the Etruscans become extinct?  What
about the Myans and the Incas?  Why are they extinct?

Inquiring minds would like to know.

DrCee
Not a pharma shill so the germ theory of disease is a scientific fraud
to me.
D. C. Sessions - 18 Feb 2008 17:02 GMT
>> In message <ea958eac-3478-466d-aa4b-
>
> Tell us, oh great seer, why did the Etruscans become extinct?  What
> about the Myans and the Incas?  Why are they extinct?

None of them are extinct except in the sense that the 17th
Century English are too: they lived out their lives.
The descendents of the Etruscans are modern Italians (and
having a bit of a fashion today.  "Tuscan" this and "Tuscan"
that.)  The Mayan empire (built on the ruins of the Olmecs)
collapsed without major depopulation.

The Incas were conquered by the Spanish -- although the
waves of epidemics that struck in the 16th century certainly
made *that* little exercise easier.  However, I didn't
want to confuse you with Columbian epidemics that happened
in contact with Europeans, since there are too many ways
to fake up excuses there.

Which gets us back to the Mandan and the Huron.  They were
wiped out by epidemics.  Epidemics which your "straight
suffering" (Orthos-Pathos) "thinkers" turn a blind eye to
while patting themselves on their backs congratulating
themselves on how their religion explains everything.

You can make *any* notion fit the facts if you ignore facts
that don't fit the theory.

> Inquiring minds would like to know.

Changing the subject to get around the fact that your denial
of contagion fails miserably to account for uncontroverted
facts.  Others at least have the grace to be less blatant
about it.

| The most important exclamation in science isn't "Eureka!" |
|    The most important exclamation is "What the BLEEP?"    |
+---------- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> ----------+
Richard Schultz - 19 Feb 2008 05:19 GMT
:> In message <ea958eac-3478-466d-aa4b-

: Tell us, oh great seer, why did the Etruscans become extinct?  What
: about the Myans and the Incas?  Why are they extinct?

The Mayans are most certainly not extinct.

-----
Richard Schultz                              schultr@mail.biu.ac.il
Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University
-----
"You don't even have a clue about which clue you're missing."
David Wright - 26 Apr 2008 03:22 GMT
>> There's a crowd of reasons we get the flu in winter
>> By Kim Painter
[quoted text clipped - 15 lines]
>the flu, except that the flu is a more intense inner house cleaning
>event.

Yes, I guess they must be having a lot of toxins over at the Boston
Red Sox, what with several of them down with the flu at once.  Curious
how patterned this is, and how it behaves just like it were
communicable.

The whole notion of a cold or flu being some kind of "cleansing" event
is so ludicrous that I'm amazed that even a loonball like Cee can
manage to keep pushing it.

 -- David Wright :: alphabeta at copper.net
    These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
    "There are two kinds of Republicans:  millionaires and suckers."
                                                     -- John Dolan
D. C. Sessions - 26 Apr 2008 03:36 GMT
>>Very nice PA.  However, the truth is that a cold is a "healing"
>>response on the part of a "vital" organism to an inner "toxic load".
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
> is so ludicrous that I'm amazed that even a loonball like Cee can
> manage to keep pushing it.

Have you noticed how Cee and friends go all quiet when
someone asks them to demonstrate this effect by inducing a
readily-identifiable disease according to their beliefs?

For instance, how does one induce smallpox?  How about
diphtheria?  I'll settle for measles, for that matter;
it should be trivially easy given how widespread it was
a short time ago and how widespread it still is in some
places.

| sh.t happens.  Sometimes it happens to you. |
+--- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> ---+
Kevysmom - 26 Apr 2008 04:09 GMT
> Have you noticed how Cee and friends go all quiet when
> someone asks them to demonstrate this effect by inducing a
> readily-identifiable disease according to their beliefs?

You are such a cry baby!

> In message <ENWdnfM3r4FlDI_VnZ2dnUVZ_hSdn...@comcast.com>, David Wright wrote:
>
[quoted text clipped - 28 lines]
> | sh.t happens.  Sometimes it happens to you. |
> +--- D. C. Sessions <d...@lumbercartel.com> ---+
Mark Probert - 26 Apr 2008 15:27 GMT
> > Have you noticed how Cee and friends go all quiet when
> > someone asks them to demonstrate this effect by inducing a
> > readily-identifiable disease according to their beliefs?
>
> You are such a cry baby!

You are such a ding bat.
Jan Drew - 27 Apr 2008 00:02 GMT
On Apr 25, 11:09 pm, Kevysmom <bluebun...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Have you noticed how Cee and friends go all quiet when
> > someone asks them to demonstrate this effect by inducing a
> > readily-identifiable disease according to their beliefs?
>
> You are such a cry baby!

You are such a ding bat.

Read your Torah today?
Richard Schultz - 27 Apr 2008 06:10 GMT

: You are such a ding bat.
:
: Read your Torah today?

He probably read the passage in Leviticus that I brought to your attention
months ago.

-----
Richard Schultz                              schultr@mail.biu.ac.il
Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University
-----
"You don't even have a clue about which clue you're missing."
drceephd@insightbb.com - 28 Apr 2008 00:25 GMT
> For instance, how does one induce smallpox?  

That is an answer that I would like to know.

How many healthy health workers exposed to smallpox by caring for the
ill contract smallpox?

Based upon the reports in the litterature, few to none contract the
disease.

Please tell us the scientific tests conducted to show that smallpox is
definately infective and up to 80% fatal when the actual reports prove
that smallpox is not communicable nor fatal when treated properly.

And please do not give me your Huron etc drivel.  Provide the
scientific tests and data.

DrCee
You cannot secure nor restore health with pus or poisons
D. C. Sessions - 28 Apr 2008 05:39 GMT
>> For instance, how does one induce smallpox?  
>
> That is an answer that I would like to know.

Wait a minute here -- you're the one who claims to have
all the answers on the subject of health and disease.

Smallpox was certainly common enough -- so, according
to you, how is it induced?  If smallpox is too tough,
you can try something that's still around like measles.

You're the self-described scientist, and as we all know
the hallmark of science is replicability of results.
It's not like the conditions have to be all that exotic
or there wouldn't have been millions of cases a year of
them.

SO -- how does one induce them?

| sh.t happens.  Sometimes it happens to you. |
+--- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> ---+
drceephd@insightbb.com - 28 Apr 2008 16:09 GMT
> In message <d7a77ee5-3f81-4564-8b12-a7e333e49...@a1g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>, drcee...@insightbb.com wrote:
>
[quoted text clipped - 20 lines]
> | sh.t happens.  Sometimes it happens to you. |
> +--- D. C. Sessions <d...@lumbercartel.com> ---+

I provide you with this paper:

Presented by Dr. Hadwin as presented on the Whale site:

From "Truth," January 17, 1923.

SANITATION v. VACCINATION.

THE ORIGIN OF SMALLPOX.

By following the superstitious impulses of Edward Jenner and the
ancient tradition of time Gloucestershire dairymaids, the medical
profession has lost sight of the vital question, what is the origin of
smallpox? The faculty of reasoning upon time subject appears to have
become almost extinct; in its place there has arisen a demand for
obedience to authority. Fashion has usurped the place of scientific
thought, and arbitrary Acts of Parliament and the policeman’s
truncheon have supplanted logical consistency.

When the question is asked, "Why does smallpox break out at all?" the
twentieth century scientist answers, "Because time populace have not
been ‘protected’ against it by vaccination." This reply only begs the
question. It pre-supposes that smallpox is a natural visitation of
Providence which may strike anybody at any moment, and that the only
way by which this presumed inevitable evil can be met, is to compel
every human being in this world to undergo a process of "protection,"
which is to render the system "immune" to attack. This is a negative
form of reasoning. It leaves unanswered the crucial question, what is
the origin of smallpox? Why are we to suppose, as was believed in the
eighteenth century, that a smallpox attack is the probable lot of
every member of the race? Why must everybody be diseased to protect
him against disease, especially if that disease is one from which,
owing to altered conditions, lie is never likely to suffer? Surely, if
a disease breaks out there must be a cause for it.

THE SOURCE OF ALL "OUTBREAKS."

Now one fact stands out pre-eminently in every part of time world
where smallpox has appeared—namely, it has been invariably associated
with insanitary and unhygienic conditions. From time immemorial it has
been called in Austria "The Beggar’s Disease." It has followed in the
wake of filth, poverty, wars, pestilences, famines, and general
insanitation, in all ages. It accompanied the clash of arms of the
American armies in their struggle for independence, and in their Civil
and Spanish wars; it claimed more victims than the battlefield in the
ravages of the Crimea; it formed the dark background to the triumphant
marches of the German army in 1870; it increased tenfold the horrors
of the siege of Paris; and plagued our warriors at Tel-el-Kebir. Even
during the late Great War no inconsiderable amount of smallpox
occurred amongst all the armies involved wherever conditions of
unsanitation triumphed over the scrupulous efforts made to circumvent
them. Smallpox outbreaks and epidemics have invariably been the call
of Nature to responsible authorities at home: "Put your house in
order"; personal municipal, and civic cleanliness has been her
unvarying demand, a demand which was couched in one striking
injunction by the prophet of old: "Wash and be clean."

Comment:
What we have here is empirical data.  First hand data gathered and
reported upon by an eminent MD of the time.
Now, where is the scientifically verified data proving the cause of
smallpox?
Where is the scientifically verified data proving that the vaccine is
safe and effective?

DrCee
You cannot secure nor restore health with pus or poisons.
Richard Schultz - 28 Apr 2008 16:13 GMT
: THE SOURCE OF ALL "OUTBREAKS."
:
: Now one fact stands out pre-eminently in every part of time world
: where smallpox has appeared?namely, it has been invariably associated
: with insanitary and unhygienic conditions. From time immemorial it has
: been called in Austria "The Beggar?s Disease."

How is it that smallpox no longer occurs even in "insanitary and
unhygienic conditions"?  For example, areas in which diseases such as
polio, malaria, and cholera still occur.

: Now, where is the scientifically verified data proving the cause of
: smallpox?
: Where is the scientifically verified data proving that the vaccine is
: safe and effective?

There is a stock of smallpox virus at (IIRC) the CDC in Atlanta.  Would
you volunteer to be injected with some?

-----
Richard Schultz                              schultr@mail.biu.ac.il
Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University
-----
"You don't even have a clue about which clue you're missing."
D. C. Sessions - 28 Apr 2008 16:45 GMT
>> In message <d7a77ee5-3f81-4564-8b12-a7e333e49...@a1g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>, drcee...@insightbb.com wrote:
>>
[quoted text clipped - 26 lines]
>
> THE ORIGIN OF SMALLPOX.

(Generic appeal to general sanitation, no specifics)

> Smallpox outbreaks and epidemics have invariably been the call
> of Nature to responsible authorities at home: "Put your house in
> order"; personal municipal, and civic cleanliness has been her
> unvarying demand, a demand which was couched in one striking
> injunction by the prophet of old: "Wash and be clean."

Aside from the fact that it doesn't answer the question, it
also misrepresents the historical record.  Smallpox was *not*
only a disease of the dirty and unwashed; for instance, it
also struck the fanatically clean Orthodox Jewish communities
of Europe -- and not just the urban ones, but also the rural
ones where they were able to practice the separation of wells
and privies etc.

Other examples abound, but the smallpox of the Jewish shtetlen
should suffice.

By the converse, the sanitary conditions in much of the third
world would shock an 18th-century European -- and yet there's
no smallpox.  Your theory is not working very well here.

> Comment:
> What we have here is empirical data.  First hand data gathered and
> reported upon by an eminent MD of the time.

Who appears to have been purely speculating from a very limited
supply of information.

It's very easy to blame almost anything from more than a century
ago on "sanitation" since up until recently First World water
treatment, etc. didn't exist anywhere.  Then again, neither did
television.  You could as readily claim that smallpox is caused
by the absense of television.

> Now, where is the scientifically verified data proving the cause of
> smallpox?

Thank you, I'm not interested in changing the subject at this
time.  Let's discuss alternative medicine.

Your theory proposes that there is a "sanitation" based cause
for smallpox.  I keep asking for a testable hypothesis, and
you keep changing the subject.  Again:

According to you, how does one induce smallpox?  Specifics,
please, so that the hypothesis can be tested.

| sh.t happens.  Sometimes it happens to you. |
+--- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> ---+
drceephd@insightbb.com - 28 Apr 2008 16:15 GMT
> In message <d7a77ee5-3f81-4564-8b12-a7e333e49...@a1g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>, drcee...@insightbb.com wrote:
>
[quoted text clipped - 20 lines]
> | sh.t happens.  Sometimes it happens to you. |
> +--- D. C. Sessions <d...@lumbercartel.com> ---+

Here is another very revealing article from the Whale site:

GLOUCESTER.

I remember, too, the epidemic in Gloucester in 1895-6. I was in and
out of the smallpox houses throughout that visitation of nearly 2,000
cases. The echo of it is still heard among time ranks of Jennerian
followers, and always with time tragic whisper, "Gloucester was an
unvaccinated city!" Never in all time history of professional
scaremongering was such a determined effort made to boost vaccination,
and never a word was uttered as to the shocking insanitary conditions
which produced the tragedy. In fact, those conditions were
persistently denied by time officials who were responsible for them.

The smallpox was practically confined to the southern half of the
city, where there was no fall for the sewage. The pipes had been
hurriedly laid in this new district without concrete base or cemented
joints. There was a drought that lasted months; time water supply ran
short; flushing of the sewers had to be discontinued, and time
sewerage pipes became choked. When, after time epidemic was over,
investigation was made, the pipes were found to be broken in all
directions; in fact, the whole district of—for the most part—crowded
houses, many of them back-to-back with no through ventilation, lay
over what was nothing more nor less than a huge cesspit. The outlets
for the sewer-gas consisted of street manholes, which belched their
poison into time atmosphere. I traced the first case of smallpox in
every street to the house nearest to a manhole. Wooden stoppers were
made to close them down, but they had to be used sparingly lest the
sewer-gas should be driven into the houses. Hundreds of the houses
were drawing their water supply from shallow wells, liable to
contamination by constant leakage into them from house drains; and the
sewage-pipes in numerous instances ran under the floors of the houses
from the closets at the back to the street in front. Some of the
houses had their w.c.s in the back kitchen. In one street of 114
houses the latter were supplied with water declared by the city
surveyor to be contaminated with sewage from its source to its
delivery, and as it had not force enough to fill the flushing tanks,
the w.c.s were never flushed and always choked, the contents being
emptied periodically on to the small garden ground attached.

In some of these tiny houses there were seven, nine, and even twelve
cases of smallpox. A sixth part of the whole epidemic occurred in
three streets. In one street the sewage entered the cellars of the
houses, and the choked-up street sewer had to be opened up in the
midst of the epidemic. Nearly half the houses in this street had
smallpox cases. Then the epidemic caught on in two disgracefully
insanitary and overcrowded, ill-ventilated elementary schools. Forty-
five children were struck down suddenly in one of them and 31 in the
other. The patients were removed to what was called an isolation
hospital. It was congregation, not isolation. A woman employed in the
early part of the epidemic as solitary night nurse told me that time
sight and screaming of these poor children at night as they ran about
the wards in delirium so completely unnerved her that she was obliged
to leave. They were allowed no water for their fevered skins, time
baths were choked with dirty linen, and never used. The little ones
were packed three, four, and even five in a bed; vermin was crawling
everywhere; no oil was used for the faces, and the poor children
scratched themselves till they bled. Of every two taken in to the
Stroud Road Hospital one was carried out a corpse; when the mortuary
became choked with dead bodies, the bathroom was utilised for this
purpose. One child lay for two weeks and two days with her eyes
scabbed and not a single drop of water was given to relieve her. When
one hospital became full, another one was opened which had been used
as a cholera hospital many years before. It was built on stakes in a
rough, boggy field; it had no sewerage connections, nor any drainage
whatever, and water had to be carried in water-carts over a quarter of
a mile of bog to reach it.

The panic became fearful, and a wild, despairing cry went up from the
plague-stricken city as the destroying angel sped from house to house
in these awful slums. And what was the answer the terror-stricken
inhabitants received from the Guardians of Public Health? Still the
same mad reply: "These be thy gods, O Israel!" as they pointed to the
vaccine lancets, dripping with their filthy venom; in helplessness and
fear they implored the people, in a unanimously signed medical
manifesto, to bow down and worship at the shrine.

At last the rain came. It washed time atmosphere, it flushed the
sewers and drains; it filled the vacuoles of sewer gas in the sandy
soil, and the epidemic died down. The councillors who put up at the
next municipal contest were one and all indignantly swept away at the
polls by the enraged voters, and anti-vaccinationists took their
place; a new sewerage system was laid throughout the whole smallpox
district at a cost of some £30,000; 20,000 sanitary defects in the
houses were rectified, and no smallpox has occurred since, although
nearly 90 per cent, of the population is unvaccinated. But even in
that awful epidemic, smallpox picked out the vaccinated for attack;
two-thirds of the sufferers had been "protected" by time filthy
superstitious rite.

Comment:
Where is your scientifically valid data to refute these observations?

DrCee
You cannot secure nor restore health with pus or poisons.
D. C. Sessions - 28 Apr 2008 16:53 GMT
>> In message <d7a77ee5-3f81-4564-8b12-a7e333e49...@a1g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>, drcee...@insightbb.com wrote:
>>
[quoted text clipped - 20 lines]
>
> GLOUCESTER.

(another typical whaleto anti-vaccination rant)

> Where is your scientifically valid data to refute these observations?

That's a different subject.  I'm trying to discuss alternative
medicine, not vaccination.  How, pray tell, does *your* theory
of disease propose that smallpox happens?  Just looking for a
testable hypothesis here, something I can try on myself.

Smallpox was once practically universal, so it shouldn't
require anything exotic -- for instance, it was well documented
to have struck the Navajo.  Many of them haven't changed their
way of life much in the last century, so I should be able to
reproduce the conditions that caused them to get it today.

| sh.t happens.  Sometimes it happens to you. |
+--- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> ---+
drceephd@insightbb.com - 28 Apr 2008 21:15 GMT
> In message <e227ec5d-aef1-49c6-bb87-6147f7ea3...@m44g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>, drcee...@insightbb.com wrote:
>
[quoted text clipped - 43 lines]
>
> - Show quoted text -

You claim that smallpox is a communicable disease controlled only by
vaccination.

Where the hell is your scientifically valid proof of that statement?

Prove that and any "alt" claim fades into the realm of fairy tales,
which of course your claim is if you cannot provide reproduceable data
to show that smallpox is communicable and controlled only by vaccines.

DrCee
You cannot secure nor restore health with pus or poisons.
D. C. Sessions - 29 Apr 2008 03:03 GMT
>> In message <e227ec5d-aef1-49c6-bb87-6147f7ea3...@m44g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>, drcee...@insightbb.com wrote:
>>
[quoted text clipped - 40 lines]
> You claim that smallpox is a communicable disease controlled only by
> vaccination.

I'm not claiming anything here -- I'm trying to discuss
*you* theory of disease.  Which is, according to the charter,
the purpose of this newsgroup.  Why don't you want to discuss
your own theory of health and disease?

> Where the hell is your scientifically valid proof of that statement?

Still trying to change the subject.  This is misc.health.ALTERNATIVE
and you are, or so you have told us, an advocate of an ALTERNATIVE
theory of disease.  I'm asking about that.  I'm being very careful
not to misrepresent your position -- but you are refusing to even
_state_ one.

> Prove that and any "alt" claim fades into the realm of fairy tales,
> which of course your claim is if you cannot provide reproduceable data
> to show that smallpox is communicable and controlled only by vaccines.

Why don't you want to discuss your own beliefs instead of
denigrating others'?

| sh.t happens.  Sometimes it happens to you. |
+--- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> ---+
drceephd@insightbb.com - 28 Apr 2008 21:28 GMT
> In message <e227ec5d-aef1-49c6-bb87-6147f7ea3...@m44g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>, drcee...@insightbb.com wrote:
>
[quoted text clipped - 43 lines]
>
> - Show quoted text -

Alternative medicine claims that smallpox was not and is not caused by
a virus but rather by poverty, squalor, poor nutrition, and even
poorer sanitation and hygiene.  The fact that the historical record
supports this claim is very telling.

Where is your "scientifically" valid data that refutes this claim and
proves that smallpox is caused by a "virus", possibly from a cow
(  pardon my laughter here ), and preventable by some mysterious
vaccination?

DrCee
You cannot secure nor restore health with pus or poisons.
D. C. Sessions - 29 Apr 2008 03:14 GMT
>> In message <e227ec5d-aef1-49c6-bb87-6147f7ea3...@m44g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>, drcee...@insightbb.com wrote:
>>
[quoted text clipped - 42 lines]
> poorer sanitation and hygiene.  The fact that the historical record
> supports this claim is very telling.

So please tell me how to reproduce smallpox.  Poverty, squalor,
poor nutrition, and execrable sanitation are still available
in large parts of the world, and since smallpox [1] was not
confined to areas with those characteristics it can't be all
that hard to induce.  Please tell me how.

> Where is your "scientifically" valid data that refutes this claim

Well, as above: smallpox [1] was not confined to the poor,
smallpox [1] was not confined to those living in squalor,
nutrition has (as you and other alternative health advocates
tell us) gotten worse rather than better, smallpox [1]
afflicted even those maintaining meticulous standards of
sanitation.

Today, there are still far too many places where people are
living in crushing poverty and squalor, eating (if you can
call it that) things that would gag a maggot, and drinking
what might as well be raw sewage.  Yet smallpox cases are
not to be found.

So there's something missing from this picture.  Please
describe, in detail, some means whereby one might reliably
induce smallpox [1] to confirm your hypothesis.  This is,
after all, science -- or so you claim.

[1] Or measles, to name two.  One problem with your broad
   description is that you don't distinguish between the
   causes of different diseases, and yet they are manifestly
   not the same so *something* must cause those differences.

| sh.t happens.  Sometimes it happens to you. |
+--- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> ---+
Richard Schultz - 29 Apr 2008 05:29 GMT
: Alternative medicine claims that smallpox was not and is not caused by
: a virus but rather by poverty, squalor, poor nutrition, and even
: poorer sanitation and hygiene.  The fact that the historical record
: supports this claim is very telling.

What is the mechanism by which poverty, squalor, etc., lead to smallpox?
Why is it that in areas of the world currently marked by poverty, squalor,
etc., many diseases are endemic, but that smallpox is not among them?

-----
Richard Schultz                              schultr@mail.biu.ac.il
Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University
-----
"You don't even have a clue about which clue you're missing."
D. C. Sessions - 29 Apr 2008 14:21 GMT
> What is the mechanism by which poverty, squalor, etc., lead to smallpox?
> Why is it that in areas of the world currently marked by poverty, squalor,
> etc., many diseases are endemic, but that smallpox is not among them?

I'm currently rather more interested in a slightly different
question: if poverty, etc. is the cause of a long list of
diseases, what distinguishes (for example) smallpox and
plague?  *Something* must.

I have some other questions, too, but one at a time.  It's
hard enough getting Cee and the rest to talk about something
positive that I don't want to confuse them.

| sh.t happens.  Sometimes it happens to you. |
+--- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> ---+
Richard Schultz - 29 Apr 2008 14:42 GMT
:> What is the mechanism by which poverty, squalor, etc., lead to smallpox?
:> Why is it that in areas of the world currently marked by poverty, squalor,
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
: diseases, what distinguishes (for example) smallpox and
: plague?  *Something* must.

I think that we're basically asking the same thing.  You are asking what
specifically distinguishes different diseases and I am asking why some
diseases are endemic in areas in which smallpox has been wiped out; I don't
see how my question can be answered without an answer being provided for
your question as a matter of course.

-----
Richard Schultz                              schultr@mail.biu.ac.il
Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University
-----
"an optimist is a guy/ that has never had/ much experience"
D. C. Sessions - 29 Apr 2008 15:24 GMT
> :> What is the mechanism by which poverty, squalor, etc., lead to smallpox?
> :> Why is it that in areas of the world currently marked by poverty, squalor,
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
> see how my question can be answered without an answer being provided for
> your question as a matter of course.

That's easy: they claim that smallpox hasn't been eliminated,
it's still around and called something else to cover up the
total failure of vaccination.  Since I'm working very hard
to keep this from going down *that* rathole and instead
concentrate on getting a positive explanation of the
"alternative theory of disease" it's not a productive
direction to take.

| sh.t happens.  Sometimes it happens to you. |
+--- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> ---+
drceephd@insightbb.com - 29 Apr 2008 19:44 GMT
> In message <fv687n$r1...@news.iucc.ac.il>, Richard Schultz wrote:
>
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
> | sh.t happens.  Sometimes it happens to you. |
> +--- D. C. Sessions <d...@lumbercartel.com> ---+

What we are arguing is whether there is disease, a malady caused by
some infective agent as is the allopathic belief, or whether it is
really dis-ease, a malady through which the body is displaying its
internal filth and is an attempt by the vital body to restore
cleanliness and the resulting "recovery" and continued health.

Based upon my "model" of dis-ease, the condition of internal filth
dictates when the housecleaning will occur and the inate body
"intelligence" decides how that filth is to be eliminated.  One cannot
cause smallpox, the plague, or any other malady.  It is up to the body
to decide how to clean house.

Based upon your concept of disease, smallpox, the plague, etc. is
caused by some outside entity, living or dead, invading the body and
causing disease.  Why the human does not die each and every time the
human becomes ill, is not well explained, nor understood.  Where these
infective entities hide waiting to infect a human and why they do it
is not revealed as well.

Now, where is your so-called "scientific" data that shows smallpox is
"caught", that the disease is "contagious", and that your blood
poisoning is both a preventive and curative.  Certainly the research
has been done, studied, and reported in one or more of your "peer"
reviewed journals.  Provide the references or shut up.

DrCee
You cannot secure nor restore health with pus or poisons.
PeterB - 29 Apr 2008 23:32 GMT
On Apr 29, 2:44 pm, drcee...@insightbb.com wrote:

> What we are arguing is whether there is disease, a malady caused by
> some infective agent as is the allopathic belief, or whether it is
[quoted text clipped - 23 lines]
> DrCee
> You cannot secure nor restore health with pus or poisons.

DrCee, may I ask what is your concept of immunity or the function of
macrophages?
David Wright - 30 Apr 2008 03:53 GMT
>On Apr 29, 2:44 pm, drcee...@insightbb.com wrote:
>>
[quoted text clipped - 28 lines]
>DrCee, may I ask what is your concept of immunity or the function of
>macrophages?

PeterB, let me second your question about immunity.  I think even Cee
would have to admit that there are certain diseases that most people
get only once.  Yet by his concept of "internal cleansing," there is
really no reason why *any* disease should not be suffered an unlimited
number of times, given the proper conditions.

 -- David Wright :: alphabeta at copper.net
    These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
    "There are two kinds of Republicans:  millionaires and suckers."
                                                     -- John Dolan
D. C. Sessions - 30 Apr 2008 04:39 GMT
>>On Apr 29, 2:44 pm, drcee...@insightbb.com wrote:
>>>
[quoted text clipped - 34 lines]
> really no reason why *any* disease should not be suffered an unlimited
> number of times, given the proper conditions.

Not necessarily.  He's far enough from making any really
testable assertions that he could, in effect, simply say
that the body's "innate intelligence" doesn't like doing
measles more than once.  Or, for that matter, that people
*do* get measles more than once and that beliefs to the
contrary are, like contagion, simply superstitions.

Not saying that those are the answers that he *will* use,
only that you're wrong if you think that "there is really
no reason why."

| sh.t happens.  Sometimes it happens to you. |
+--- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> ---+
David Wright - 30 Apr 2008 05:10 GMT
>> In article
><4ace4e25-6520-4aba-8134-72d16d6aea31@y18g2000pre.googlegroups.com>,
[quoted text clipped - 47 lines]
>only that you're wrong if you think that "there is really
>no reason why."

Well, true.  On the other hand, I think it's the saucer people who are
behind the one-time-only thing.  You know, the same people who gave
him his PhD.

 -- David Wright :: alphabeta at copper.net
    These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
    "There are two kinds of Republicans:  millionaires and suckers."
                                                     -- John Dolan
Richard Schultz - 30 Apr 2008 05:34 GMT
: Well, true.  On the other hand, I think it's the saucer people who are
: behind the one-time-only thing.  You know, the same people who gave
: him his PhD.

Actually, when you keep in mind that the Martians were almost completely
wiped out by chickenpox, Dr. Cee's psychological motivations become much
easier to understand.  Better to go into denial ("germs don't cause disease")
than to admit that you were an agent (however inadvertent) in the genocide
of an entire race -- especially the one who ran the institution where
you got your Ph. D.

-----
Richard Schultz                              schultr@mail.biu.ac.il
Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University
-----
There's something I must tell you, there's something I must say:
The only really perfect love is one that gets away.
drceephd@insightbb.com - 30 Apr 2008 21:15 GMT
> DrCee, may I ask what is your concept of immunity or the function of
> macrophages?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
    The only kind of immunity that I know of that is truly effective
is “diplomatic” immunity whereby some politician in another country
cannot be found guilty under that country’s laws.

    The concept of “immunity” is just another hoax on a gullible and
unsuspecting public perpetrated by evil money grubbers who want to
prosper from the administering and the sale of said “immunizing”
agents.

    The germ theory of disease is false.  Even Pasteur knew and
admitted that around 1880.  The concept of administering some
concoction of monkey kidney pus, the refined excrement of rotten eggs,
or the pus from cows into a willing human is barbaric and stupid.

    The immune system exists.  However, you cannot “prime” the immune
system against organisms which will not and cannot attack the living
organism.  Antoine Bechamp, and others, have proven that if bacteria
are present in disease within the confines of your protective
membranes, those bacteria have been developed within the organism by
living entities Bechamp called “microzymas”, Enderlein called them
“endobiots”, Reich called them “Bions”, Rife called them “viral
particles”, and now Nassenes calls them “somatids.”

    As far as getting a disease a second time, a third time, or more
it has been documented.  Again, showing that the concept of “immunity”
from disease is a fiction of our imagination even if it is the
cornerstone of modern medical fraud.  The only reason more people do
not get smallpox more than once, is that the docs kill nearly 70 to
80% of them with their “treatments.”  However, the docs do admit that
you can get cholera numerous times, if you weren’t killed previously.

DrCee
You cannot secure nor restore health with pus or poisons.
PeterB - 01 May 2008 19:43 GMT
On Apr 30, 4:15 pm, drcee...@insightbb.com wrote:

> > DrCee, may I ask what is your concept of immunity or the function of
> > macrophages?- Hide quoted text -
[quoted text clipped - 37 lines]
> DrCee
> You cannot secure nor restore health with pus or poisons.

I think what Pasteur conveyed was the realization that disease is not
random, but opportunistic.  He didn't repudiate the existence of
germs, but he wanted to relinquish his phobia about them.  Vaccine as
a pharmaceutical franchise is a phobia-driven marketing campaign
designed to profit from the fear of disease, just as you said.  I
think your view is closest to being pleomorphic, owing to Claude
Bernard, who attributed disease to the biological terrain of a
"willing" host.  It may not seem like it, but in reality, modern
medicine is much closer to this view than the "disease is random"
proposition fostered by the drug makers.  The fact we don't see this
readily is only because of the constant stream of pharmaceutical
marketing and the media's reluctance to upset its corporate sponsors.
As you know, the drug makers promote the idea that "bending
markers" (germs, cholesterol, etc.) for disease is equivalent to
treating, preventing, or curing them.  The problem is that corporate
interests have been permitted to fund these concepts without tying
them to real health outcomes, however studies on the placebo effect
(and exploding disease rates) are forcing researchers to look harder
at drugs (and now vaccine) as a major source of various disease
responses.  Were it not for FDA, of course, the charade could not
exist, which is why I say that FDA must be dismantled and a new model
of healthcare allowed to emerge.  Thanks for sharing your interesting
ideas.
drceephd@insightbb.com - 01 May 2008 20:18 GMT
> I think what Pasteur conveyed was the realization that disease is not
> random, but opportunistic.

That is the concept.  However, it still assumes that bacteria, aka
germs, have the ability to invade the body and cause illness.  This is
false logic.  If it were true, each and every time we had a bacterial
disease, we would die just like we would from grangrene.

You are right on the money when you say that I am pleomorphic in my
view of bacteria.  In addition, I do not separate the little beggers
into pathogenic germs and non-pathogenic germs ( or bacteria ).

Pasteur’s own research showed and proved pleomorphism.  This
absolutely destroys the concept of “one germ for every disease”, and
the germ theory of disease.  It cannot be shown in the lab and it does
not exist in the real world.  Rosenow, of the Mayo clinic, proved it
and reported the same in the Journal of Infectious Diseases in 1914.

The “inner terrain” or the “inner soil” is the true cause of all
diseases, each and every one stemming from a condition termed
“toxemia.”  However, it is important to understand and realize that
all bacteria found in a condition of disease within the membranes came
from the body itself, and not from some outside source.  It is also
important to realize that when the inner terrain has been cleansed,
the bacteria revert back to their original forms, disappear from the
doctor’s sight, and the body “recovers” to go on.  No anti-biotics
needed.

Have a healthy day.

DrCee
You cannot secure nor restore health with pus or poisons.

 Thanks for sharing your interesting
> ideas.- Hide quoted text -

And thank you for yours.

DrCee
You cannot secure nor restore health with pus or poisons.
D. C. Sessions - 02 May 2008 03:21 GMT
> That is the concept.  However, it still assumes that bacteria, aka
> germs, have the ability to invade the body and cause illness.  This is
> false logic.  If it were true, each and every time we had a bacterial
> disease, we would die just like we would from grangrene.

That only follows if the body has no defensive response
to said microorganisms.  By all means dispute the existence
of such defenses, but your statement assumes their nonexistence
without attempting to support the assumption.

| sh.t happens.  Sometimes it happens to you. |
+--- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> ---+
D. C. Sessions - 30 Apr 2008 03:47 GMT
>> In message <fv687n$r1...@news.iucc.ac.il>, Richard Schultz wrote:
>>
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
> internal filth and is an attempt by the vital body to restore
> cleanliness and the resulting "recovery" and continued health.

> Based upon my "model" of dis-ease, the condition of internal filth
> dictates when the housecleaning will occur and the inate body
> "intelligence" decides how that filth is to be eliminated.  One cannot
> cause smallpox, the plague, or any other malady.  It is up to the body
> to decide how to clean house.

So, if I understand you correctly, it is impossible for you to
distinguish the conditions that produce (for instance) plague
from those that produce a common cold or malaria.  As a result,
your belief makes no testable predictions regarding "this kind
of pollution results in these symptoms."  Conversely, the
symptoms themselves do not indicate the nature of the root
cause.

Is this correct?

| sh.t happens.  Sometimes it happens to you. |
+--- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> ---+
drceephd@insightbb.com - 30 Apr 2008 21:31 GMT
> In message <8af90edb-85ce-4799-b80e-71fd39816...@b64g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>, drcee...@insightbb.com wrote:
>
[quoted text clipped - 39 lines]
>
> - Show quoted text -

You are casting too broad of a net here.

The cold and the flu are “healing responses” on the part of a vital
body to accumulated internal filth.  The filth must be removed to
allow for normal cellular activity and health.

The end result of accumulating internal filth, acidification of the
tissues, and a lack of proper oxygen levels results in cancer.  Do you
wish to claim that cancer is a contagious epidemic in America?

Under the conditions of stress, foul water, poor or no food,
malnutrition, crowding, and a general lack of sanitation and
cleanliness, the stage has been set for an outbreak of “dis-ease”
among the unfortunate.  Whether the outward manifestation of the
internal stress and poisoning occurring is smallpox, the plague, etc.
is up to the body to determine and the so called “doctor” to name.
How many suffer and die is determined by the additional poisons
administered by the docs and the overall treatment provided.

DrCee
You cannot secure nor restore health with pus or poisons.
D. C. Sessions - 01 May 2008 03:58 GMT
>> In message <8af90edb-85ce-4799-b80e-71fd39816...@b64g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>, drcee...@insightbb.com wrote:
>>
[quoted text clipped - 45 lines]
> body to accumulated internal filth.  The filth must be removed to
> allow for normal cellular activity and health.

So you distinguish between the conditions that produce the
relatively mild upper respiratory diseases (also perhaps
others) and more extreme ones such as plague.

I would then ask for a specific, replicable set of conditions
for inducing a "cold" or similar phenomenon.

> The end result of accumulating internal filth, acidification of the
> tissues, and a lack of proper oxygen levels results in cancer.  Do you
> wish to claim that cancer is a contagious epidemic in America?

That's easy enough to test; what pH level is the threshold
for (to pick one) leukemia?  It's not all that hard to measure
resting venous pH for a large group of people over time, so
all that's needed for a good study is a predicted threshold
pH that indicates incipient leukemia.

> Under the conditions of stress, foul water, poor or no food,
> malnutrition, crowding, and a general lack of sanitation and
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> How many suffer and die is determined by the additional poisons
> administered by the docs and the overall treatment provided.

I believe that this is pretty much what I summarized above,
to wit:

it is impossible for you to distinguish the conditions that
produce (for instance) plague from those that produce (measles)
or malaria.  As a result, your belief makes no testable
predictions regarding 'this kind of pollution results in these
symptoms.'  Conversely, the symptoms themselves do not indicate
the nature of the root cause.

As revised, is this an accurate statement of your belief?

| sh.t happens.  Sometimes it happens to you. |
+--- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> ---+
D. C. Sessions - 01 May 2008 04:17 GMT
> The end result of accumulating internal filth, acidification of the
> tissues, and a lack of proper oxygen levels results in cancer.  Do you
> wish to claim that cancer is a contagious epidemic in America?

I am advised that I missed a better suggestion when I
suggested venous pH as a candidate predictor of leukemia.

What skin pH do you consider to be the threshold for skin
cancers?  Is there a difference between the triggers for
basal cell carcinoma and melanoma?

| sh.t happens.  Sometimes it happens to you. |
+--- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> ---+
drceephd@insightbb.com - 01 May 2008 16:23 GMT
> In message <c9c12e86-5cf3-4e2f-af82-1f7d55f18...@m45g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>, drcee...@insightbb.com wrote:
>
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
> | sh.t happens.  Sometimes it happens to you. |
> +--- D. C. Sessions <d...@lumbercartel.com> ---+

I suggest you research the work by Warburg that earned him more than
one Nobel prize nomination.  Why, and how, was he able to convert
normal cells into cancer cells, and vice versa?

DrCee
You cannot secure nor restore health with pus or poisons.
D. C. Sessions - 02 May 2008 03:17 GMT
>> In message <c9c12e86-5cf3-4e2f-af82-1f7d55f18...@m45g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>, drcee...@insightbb.com wrote:
>>
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
> one Nobel prize nomination.  Why, and how, was he able to convert
> normal cells into cancer cells, and vice versa?

Since there are no requirements for a Nobel nomination (you
can nominate yourself, for that matter.  By all means do)
that's neither here nor there.  I'm asking *you* what *you*
believe: what is the threshold pH for skin cancer?  That is
easily measured by just anyone, so publishing that information
here on MHA (where you have a willing audience) may save
someone.

Why not just tell the group?

| sh.t happens.  Sometimes it happens to you. |
+--- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> ---+
David Wright - 05 May 2008 04:04 GMT
>Based upon my "model" of dis-ease, the condition of internal filth
>dictates when the housecleaning will occur and the inate body
>"intelligence" decides how that filth is to be eliminated.  One cannot
>cause smallpox, the plague, or any other malady.  It is up to the body
>to decide how to clean house.

So your "model" is entirely useless, since it makes absolutely no
predictions about when or why a person would get sick.  It's just
magic.  At some point, the "innate intelligence" decides the point of
illness has been reached, so the person gets sick.

But you can't tell us what the "internal filth" is, or how you know
it's there, or how you know the body is getting rid of it during
illness, or how much it's getting rid of.

You also can't explain why, when one person becomes ill, people who
have had close contact with that person also frequently become ill,
but other nearby people who had no such contact do not.

 -- David Wright :: alphabeta at copper.net
    These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
    "There are two kinds of Republicans:  millionaires and suckers."
                                                     -- John Dolan
D. C. Sessions - 05 May 2008 04:31 GMT
> You also can't explain why, when one person becomes ill, people who
> have had close contact with that person also frequently become ill,
> but other nearby people who had no such contact do not.

He doesn't need to because it doesn't happen.

| sh.t happens.  Sometimes it happens to you. |
+--- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> ---+
David Wright - 06 May 2008 02:05 GMT
>> You also can't explain why, when one person becomes ill, people who
>> have had close contact with that person also frequently become ill,
>> but other nearby people who had no such contact do not.
>
>He doesn't need to because it doesn't happen.

Defining one's own reality by ignoring any inconvenient facts does make
supporting one's theory a lot easier.

 -- David Wright :: alphabeta at copper.net
    These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
    "There are two kinds of Republicans:  millionaires and suckers."
                                                     -- John Dolan
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.