don't get comfortable

[theist 1]

WHO says flu pandemic could kill millions

--

 

Big News Network.com Friday 26th November, 2004

 

The world is closer to the next flu pandemic that may kill up to 7 million people, a World Health Organization expert warns.

 

A worldwide outbreak is closer than ever because of bird flu, says Klaus Stohr, coordinator of WHO's global influenza program.

 

Bird flu has killed 32 people in Thailand and Vietnam this year and killed six in Hong Kong in 1997.

 

Stohr predicted more than a quarter of the world's estimated 6.4 billion population will fall ill from influenza, the Hong Kong-based South China Morning Post reported.

 

There are estimates that would put the number of deaths in the range of 2 to 7 million and the numbers of people affected will go beyond a billion because 25 to 30 percent will fall ill, he told a news briefing at a meeting in Bangkok of 13 Asian nations and cities.

 

Stohr said two U.S. companies are developing vaccines for testing but the world faces a tricky winter and spring period as no vaccines would be available until at least March.

 

Officials have said a vaccine would not prevent a pandemic but could save millions of lives.

 

 

[Guest guest]

Of all the germ distributors, the most notorious is from before our time. Dr Arthur W. Waite - not to be confounded with his contemporary, A. E. Waite of the Golden Dawn - wanted in 1916 to kill his father-in-law. He turned out to be an embarrassment to medical science and by proxy to the bio-warfare industry.

In his lab, he had billions of germs; microbes, bacilli, bacteria and vira. He fed the old man diphtheria and got no results. Then he induced his father-in-law to use a nasal spray, in which he planted whole colonies of tuberculosis. Not a single cough was heard. Next he fed him calomel, to weaken his resistance. He tried typhoid; he tried the flue. He even sent the plague and when all failed, he went common and used Arsenic. That worked.

If anything, one gets the impression that diets and inhalations of germs, bacilli and microbes, bacteria and vira are good for your health. The scare of biological warfare is but a scare - like Santa Claus to little children.

[theist 1]

Good for the health? Well I believe they all have very different effects on the body. HIV for example. Or for that matter the HVC virus that has been living in my liver for 35 years. I don't find any health benefits from thewir presence.

[Guest guest]

Let us look at the virus theory a little closer. It is but an assumption that viruses cause disease. They say their evidence is presented in the fact that when they kill the bacteria or viruses, the disease is soon gone as well. The viruses become active from some outside trigger - generally an invasion of those same germs. They attack the living cells and destroy them, in the process using the cell-DNA to multiply. A virus is really nothing more than a string of RNA-messenger cells, which need the cell’s DNA, to complete them and divide. If this is allowed to continue unabated, the body will succumb under the onslaught and the victim will die. That sounds like the correct view, is it not? After all, Pasteur already proved this more than 150 years ago, is the argument.

Pasteur made a few assumptions, which we shall scrutinise further, to discover whether they stroke with the facts or not. The first is the assumption that germs cause disease. When a disease is full-blown, what is the picture of the blood? A so-called ‘viral disease’ is characterised by a high level of viruses in the blood of victims of full-blown cases. This is - and we should note this well - invariably the case with all viral diseases. Invariably this is noted only in full-blown cases. If we examine the blood of any healthy person, we may find the virus in some cases, but never in disproportionate amounts. In the sick, everyone has a very high count, like one in every three cells..

What is important, we must consider carefully what we observe. In a full-blown case of disease, we are looking at the disease ultimate. It is an end-result. From the moment we entered primary school, we have been taught that results are always different from causes and this is scientific.

Modern medicine sees the vira as exceedingly dangerous. They think that if they do not kill them, the patient is in danger. The vira always keep on multiplying as long as the disease lasts, till death follows, says the theory. In addition, since death is the final result, as they say, we must conclude that abundance of vira is also an end-result. Then how can it be the cause?

In viral diseases, they throw this scientific principle out the window and declare that cause and result is one and the same thing. This is unscientific, to say the least. It has no place in any scientific discussion, least of all medicine, where lives are dependent on thorough scientific principles and procedures. Why then does that not count for germs?

Germs are the exception to the rule, they say. That makes for many exceptions to the rule, for there are many different germs associated with disease. There are several gut bacteria, such as salmonella and escheria coli, to name but a few, totalling more than thirty different ones. Most of them we homoeopaths use as the bowel nosodes. There is more than a just a hand-full of viruses, quite a few bacilli and microbes and then we do not even count the ones they have not yet discovered. Together, this veritable cornucopia of creatures makes for over 100 exceptions to the rule. That is exceptional by itself. It is therefore complete nonsense and subsequently thoroughly unscientific.

Then how come that when they are killed, the disease also is finished? Because these drugs are suppressing the disease, which will reappear soon enough. The function of the germs is different from what Pasteur presented and that is why they cannot be exceptions to the rule and therefore do not cause disease. If the medical scientists paid attention to what they see, they would have noticed that viruses attack only cells with receptors, to which they can react. Healthy cells do not have those markers, so the virus cannot attack them. Why else are we not constantly sick?

You must have heard of the squatter’s movement here in Europe and especially in Amsterdam. They occupy houses that have been kept empty for more than a year, to allow real-estate speculators to drive up the prices for living. It is a sick society that allows this. Disease is like squatters, who occupy cells, on which they hang signs - ‘squatted’ - known as receptors. It is a sick body that allows this to happen, just like the speculators and the housing prices in our society. The situation with the squatters is that the Riot Squad - part of the police force - comes by and kicks them out, often destroying the building immediately after, so it cannot be re-squatted.

The viruses are the Riot Squad, which comes to kick out the disease and destroy the cells, so they can no longer be used by the disease. They only destroy cells with receptors; that is, the sick cells. The fantastic story that they attack healthy cells is therefore complete hogwash. Instead of appreciating the work the viruses do, they mistake them for the squatters and send in the army, to destroy the police force. They create a civil war inside the body, with heavy drugs.

Generally, a civil war ruins the country. If we look at the Aids phenomenon, it is this civil war, which destroyed the bodies of the victims. General Gordon is always fighting at the wrong front. Here, as another aside is proof, the rules of warfare do not apply to healing and medicine.

Saddam Hussein suppressed the opposition and its symptoms - free press, demonstrations, you know, the lot. Yet the opposition did not disappear. Saddam's society was sick and remained so. Mind you, putting him aside has not exactly improved the situation. It also does not invalidate the comparison, but only reinforces it.

Similarly, allopathic medicines suppress the symptoms, pain, inflammations, rashes, you know; the lot. Yet the diseases do not disappear. Like the opposition in Iraq, they go underground and spread. The body is a sick one and remains so. The spread must occur, for metastasis is the inevitable outcome of suppression. It is a law of nature, you see and these laws can't be violated, without paying a price. Regardless which drug you use to kill the virus, it will spread.

Again the Iraqi situation is the perfect example. For similarly, the American and British armies also fail to kill the opposition and as we see in the news, the opposition only becomes stronger. General Gordon fights an unjustifiable war; for civil war is the wrong front. The medical equivalent is similar. Those powerful drugs and massive doses are bound to cause aggravation.

Disease can also be compared to a spring clean up. Disease must be eliminated from the body, to truly disappear. The doctors merely hide it, as a bad cleaning lady sweeps the dirt under the mat. Now if you have a cleaning lady that sweeps the dirt under the mat, you fire her!

Yet they demand that doctors, who also sweep the dirt under the mat, should be kept on, as bad cleaning ladies. Why should we allow them so much more leeway? What privilege or merit do you think they possess, to be treated differently? Personally, I think none.

At the clean up, the body opens an outlet, from which the dirt is released, be it pus, rashes, cancerous growths, warts or purging, whatever. Their orthodox treatment closes the door, by using medicines, creams, chemo-therapy, radiation or surgery, whatever takes their fancy. Metastasis means nothing less, than the body seeking a new outlet. You close the door? The body will open the windows. You also close the windows? It will, if necessary, blow off the roof. But it will never disappear, till you have brought it back to its original outlet or have buried the victim.

Let me quote to you James Tyler Kent, a nineteenth century homoeopath, who pointed out what was wrong in his time and which is still the same today. 'Anything that looks away from exactitude is unscientific. The physician must be classical; everything must be methodical. Science ceases to be scientific, when disorderly application of the law is made,’

Here is another quote, by the same Dr Kent. 'Most doctors have gone crazy over the ‘vicious microbe’ as being the cause of disease and think the little fellows exceedingly dangerous. As a matter of fact, the microbes are scavengers. I wonder if scientists reflect when they make statements about bacteria. Naturally they would say that the more bacteria the more danger, but this is not so. It is well known that shortly after death a prick from the scalpel is a serious matter. This is due to the ptomaines of the corpse; but when the cadaver has become green and filled with bacteria, it is comparatively harmless. The microbe is not the cause of disease. We should not be carried away by these idle allopathic dreams and vain imaginations, but should correct the vital force. The bacterium is an innocent fellow and if he carries disease, he carries the simple substance, which causes disease, just as an elephant would.' So if we follow the reasoning viruses cause disease, then we have to shoot all the elephants?

In the recent tsunami disaster, we also heard from the WHO that the dead do not pose a direct health hazard, but that sewage, contaminating drinking water supplies, is very dangerous. Better to first treat the living, before you clear the dead. That was the message and correctly so.

This explains also why, when a 'viral' disease is around, not everyone will get the disease. Two people working next to each other will not be both sick, when the one is a happy person. His colleague will not be able to infect him. Why else does not everyone get sick during the flue season? Some people have better immunity, which protects them better, they will say.

 

Happiness and contentment form the best immunity. Each person who gets the flue has a mental or emotional problem, is discontent and is unhappy or makes himself so. If you go from home without sufficient clothes, you do have a mental problem, for then you are a fool. The result is that promptly you will catch a cold. A happy man is smart enough to bring a jacket on a warm day, followed by a cold night. Only those that refuse to use their brains do not think ahead and catch colds. As soon as the temperature drops, they become cold and decidedly unhappy. Unhappy people get sick - there are no bones about it.

Moreover, if viral or other microbial entities could cause disease, we would be sick all the time, since they are in the air we breathe and our bodies are infested with millions of them in a large variety. We shall speak later more about ‘Slime City’. The immune system would never get a break, from the constant assault of a great variety of disease 'causes.'

Since the immune system is already not discriminatory - letting in everything, before it reacts - it would be incessantly assaulted with countless diseases. In other words, you would never leave your bed healthy, from the day you were born. This is an unrealistic scenario, to use one of the milder terms, and an obvious indication that these so-called pathogens do not deserve that name. As a theory, it is fallacious, certainly not borne out by the facts and therefore unscientific.

As soon as the ease of life is gone, that is dis-ease. Where does that show itself, other than in your mind, your emotions and in your body? Not anywhere else is it found. Therefore, how can they say that disease comes from germs? Or alternatively, as they now like to fancy, that disease is coming from the genes? That is the fabrication of another couple of modern myths.

HIV is imaginary and mythological, as we discovered. The cause of disease from germs is mythological too - albeit not fabricated by the doctors, but Pasteur. The genes causing disease, is just another myth. Genes are not deterministic, however much they would like them to be so. That is another myth, for we know that every cell in the body has the same chromosome packet with the same genes, yet they are all different cells. So how has the gene determined the diseased function, form and structure of each sick cell?

By mythological means apparently, for it has no other possibility, being not deterministic. In the modern understanding, myth has no basis in reality. According to the dictionary: ‘Myth, a figment; a commonly held belief that is untrue, or without foundation.’ Genes act through feedback loops, which help the cells develop according to their environment. Thus a cell becomes a blood cell, an epidermic cell or a muscle cell, because its surroundings determine the need. General Gordon is having the wrong map in his fight against an imaginary enemy.

Their causes consist solely on false conjectures and fictions of the imagination. For it is a false conjecture, to say the disease is in the antibodies or the viral load. Cause and result remain different eternally, regardless their insistence they are the same. Nobody can experience the viral load as such, for he cannot even know it is there, until their tests reveal it. It is a figment of the imagination to assign causal power to a concomitant and end-result of disease; the germs.

It is moreover a fiction - another myth - that with the death of the so-called disease cause - in casu the germ - the disease has been conquered. Their entire non-system is mythological and shows itself to be imaginary on so many counts; I wonder why such is allowed. Con men are generally put in jail, when they are exposed.

Furthermore, to call someone cured, when he is still suffering the effects of medicine, is not only self-delusion, but also deception of the patient. He seldom believes the doctor anyway, just because he still feels sick, I can guarantee you. Here is another example of General Gordon’s syndrome.

 

[theist 1]

That is quite a lenthy post and I will have to read it in full when I have more time.

 

In short I do agree that much is laid on germs that are not the main cause of disease. Myself I have not had a flu illness in over thirty years, in fact, not even a common cold whereas as a child I had several sever colds a year and caught the flu like everyone else.

 

Once I became vegan and avoided milk products my problem vanished. I still have a chronic sinus condition that I have to control by saline irrigation but I know that to be caused by food allergies.

 

I see some germs as opputunitists. A toxic body to us is home sweet home to them. Afterall they are just going about their natural lifes and hold no personal resentment towards humans. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

 

But then we have something like hep. c which sets up home on the iron molecules stored in the liver and by their presence can completely destroy the liver. Also what about polio?

 

Seems like both sides of this one may have some merit.

 

Would you consider me childish for being extra cautious I wonder? If I am forced to use the public restroom I open the door using my shirt sleeve as a barrier to touching the outside knob. Once inside I grab a paper towel and in that way avoid ever touching anything in the room, even the water faucet, with my bare hands. I also use the second towel as the first one has been hanging there and may have touched by the previous person. I also periodically use a bleach spray on the soles of my shoes because of what I may bring into my apt. from the street and such places.

 

Of course I know this is not 100% protection and still I must breath in there. I can't let myself think of what is in the air. It's just too ghastly. lol Thank God I am not the lungs.

 

OCD or common sense? I am sure different people would give me both answers.

 

So as one not worried by bacteria and such do you feel you can just throw caution to the wind?

 

BTW that article above, was it written by you?

[Guest guest]

to begin with the last question, yes. I wrote this. I will put my name under all my posts, so you know who is the author.

avoiding milk is a very good way to avoid colds and flue.

Milk is for sacrifice and not for drinking. better make ghee and offer to the deities.

your sinus condition, plus your desire for sweets, make me think that around 4pm, you have a sinking of the strength and need to eat something and have a little rest. if so, buy Lycopodium clavatum 200C and take a single pill. your sinus problem will belong to the past.

Happiness is the best immunity.

Hep C you can get from someone sick with it - the mere touch may do it.

Polio is often the result of a famine, when the people eat too many chickpeas. chickpeas cause polio.

I know this sounds outrageous, but alas, it is the sad truth. the ayurveda says you must not eat more than seven chickpeas a day - it says that not for nothing.

Vaikunthanath das Kaviraj.

[Guest guest]

you need not use your shirt to touch the handle, for then you touch the shirt, when putting it back in your pants. you wash your hands after the loo, so what is the problem?

there is no need to fear the little critters we call germs. i recommend you read my post in full.

[theist 1]

I remember reading many of your posts in the past on other forums. I thought it had a professional ring to it.

 

I will try the remedy you suggest, and yes my symptoms are exactly as you described. In the past I used stimulating herbs to get past that but have ceased that practice and now just allow myself to rest. Much better. One devotee and I were talking one day and he mentioned he had quit caffein. I asked him "What do you do when you get tired?" He answered "I rest". I was floored. LOL It was a 'zen' moment.

 

I use my shirt sleeve actually but I know it's weaknesses. I am more likely to carry extra paper towels then let my skin touch the knob. I just saw the Avaitor about Howard Hughes and the thing is I understand him to a point but he thought about it too much. I have determined that when I catch myself washing the dishes twice in a row that I will seek pyschiatric attention.

[Guest guest]

qoute="Hep C you can get from someone sick with it - the mere touch may do it."

 

sorry but this is untrue

there are a lot of false rumours spread about hep C

it is NOT like other hepatits which you CAN catch from touch liek hep B.

 

Hep C is transferred by blood.

 

I have live with my husband who has hepc for the past 4 years and it has never affected me yet we share cups, kiss and have sex - it is quite safe.

 

Of course every time he has a nose bleed he runs away from me and never lets me clean his wounds or go anywhere near his toothbrush

 

prior to living with my husband I shared a house with 3 people all with hep C for a number of years - again unaffected.

 

 

Hep C is mostly common amongst IV drug users , but again another myth is that it is limited to them.

Actually it can be picked up by anyone injected with a needle - get a blood test at your doctor and you may get it, you might even get it from a vaccine administered by needle.

 

also the majority of people who develop it recover fully within just a few weeks.

Generally if they are healthy they will recover.

But peopel such as IV drug users generally have bad health to begin with and can't fight it off.

Hence why it's often seen as being a drug takers disease but actually lots of people get it every day.