'Millions may be at risk': Houston hit with 'alarming' syphilis outbreak

Richer · 2023-07-16T14:53:29Z

Millions are at risk..... if they decide to visit a doctor, that is.

[Link]
The tl;dr is: the tests are completely unreliable, and symptoms of syphilis are the exact same as their purported "cures" through history.

Tertiary syphilis cannot be distinguished from chronic mercury poisoning (inflamed bulges, later insanity). The common treatment until 1910 was slathering mercury on the skin.

Secondary syphilis cannot be distinguished from arsenic poisoning (rash, fever, sore throat, weight loss and a big clue that it's poison, not a bug: liver damage). The common treatment until 1943 was salvarsan (organic arsenic).

Primary syphilis.. well here's a quote:

"The war came and it was re-discovered that there is a marked similarity, if not a genuine identity, between the so-called first stage of 'syphilis' and smallpox vaccination."

Antibiotics as well aren't healthy. The clue is in the name: anti bio, anti life.

DeliciousTears · 2023-07-16T16:13:35Z

Richer You can see syphilis and Lyme spirochetes in a plain old light microscope in infected blood....

Richer · 2023-07-17T09:22:02Z

DeliciousTears You can also find them in healthy people (though that got mislabeled as 'latent' syphilis). Most of them never develop disease. That's the clue that spirochetes are not the cause of the symptoms. Is there any experiment where just those spirochetes were introduced into a healthy person/animal and exactly the same disease was produced? (nope)

Pointing to something and taking its existance alone as proof for it causing an effect.. is unscientific and frankly a little insane. I'm not blaming you though, it happens all the time in medical science nowadays, so people don't see the issue.

It's like claiming your neighbor is stealing your garden gnomes, so the next time you find gnomes are missing you proclaim "see, I told you it was my neighbor".

Dwoods44 · 2023-07-17T12:38:38Z

Richer Thanks for the info.

All "disease" outbreaks following the "covid" vax-bioweapon release should be questioned. All tests of said diseases should be questioned.

The plandemic has demonstrated that reported "science" is not trustworthy at this point.

Mcsnacks · 2023-07-20T02:27:30Z

Richer Bio-pertaining to living organisms or their constituents. AKA- Bacteria or Virus. Anti-biotic. Against living bacteria and viruses.

Richer · 2023-07-20T12:36:04Z

Mcsnacks Are we not bio, are we not living? Don't out bodies employ billions of bacteria for different tasks? Have you heard of the gut microbiome? Anti-bios do not and cannot distinguish.

Artex · 2023-07-20T13:45:37Z

DeliciousTears

You can see syphilis and Lyme spirochetes in a plain old light microscope in infected blood....

I think there's a closer connection between Lyme Disease, Fibromyalgia, and MS. It would point to terrain theory where the symptoms of the disease depend on the conditions in the individual patient. The Connection between Lyme Disease and Multiple Sclerosis [Link] Faces of Invisible Illness: Multiple sclerosis is Lyme disease: Anatomy of a cover-up [Link]

Mcsnacks · 2023-07-20T13:47:53Z

Richer They distinguish by stopping bacteria from producing peptidoglycan. Bacteria used to kill 30% of the population. Did you know that viruses don't kill you? They just weaken your body so that bacteria takes over, then a bacterial infection occurs and that kills you.

Mcsnacks · 2023-07-20T13:52:08Z

Dwoods44 Questioned by whom? And why would you trust the ones questioning it? Because they feel the same way you do?

PedroCarpintero · 2023-07-20T15:55:22Z

Mcsnacks Which would technically mean that no one died from the Corona Virus?

Mcsnacks · 2023-07-20T16:19:39Z

PedroCarpintero Exactly but the WHO changed how cause of death was determined and recorded in 2019. Klebsiella pneumoniae kills a lot of people after they contract a virus.Viral infections cause secondary infections which effectively compromises the immune defenses and allows the opportunistic bacteria to establish themselves. You are a host to the virus and it's goal isn't to kill.

DeliciousTears · 2023-07-20T18:09:40Z

Mcsnacks So....rabies is make believe? Marlburg/ebola hemorrhagic fevers aren't? Dengue?

Many decades ago I worked as an undergrad with plant viri.... I can assure you, some viruses can absolutely kill on their own.

Mcsnacks · 2023-07-20T21:08:16Z

DeliciousTears They can't if you are like me and have Rh negative blood. Viruses are not deadly to people with that blood type because they have enhanced IFNγ signaling. Induction of IFN gene expression leads to increased cellular resistance to viral infection and may also affect cell growth. IFN is used in the treatment of multiple sclerosis, many types of cancer, hepatitis B and C, and herpes simplex.

Richer · 2023-07-21T23:33:10Z

Mcsnacks No bacteria has ever been conclusively shown to cause disease. No "pathogenic" bacteria, introduced into a healthy host by itself (they often inject bacteria along with diseased tissue or other stuff, or do multiple passages through animals) has ever been documented to cause disease. Koch introduced his postulates as logical groundwork in order to establish pathogenicity, only to fail at it every time.

What people did is assume pathogenicity of certain bacteria. Later when they looked in people recently deceased, they found the bacteria in some of them and took that as confirmation of the pathogenicity. Of course it isn't, it's just correlation.

Viruses have not only not been scientifically shown to exist, the method to "isolate" viruses has been refuted from the start. Virus isolation through cell culture goes back to Enders paper on Measles virus 1954. In it he confirms through a control experiment, that cell culture is not a valid method to establish pathogenicity or to do isolation.

In so doing, however, it must be borne in mind that cytopathic effects which superficially resemble those resulting from infection by the measles agents may possibly be induced by other viral agents present in the monkey kidney tissue or by unknown factors.

He stopped short of realizing that "unknown factors" could be the experimental setup (cell culture with low nutrients, and poisons like antibiotics and diseased tissue from an "infected" host) - that is cells dying is to be expected if you starve and poison them. No pathogen necessary.

His colleagues confirmed this in the following years.

Rustigian 1955, Infection of Monkey Kidney Tissue Cultures with Virus-Like Agents:

an unidentified agent was encountered which induced cytopathogenic changes in cultures of monkey kidney and cancer HeLa epithelial cells.

evidence is presented that kidneys of apparently healthy monkeys are the source of these agents in monkey kidney tissue cultures and not the medium constituents.

Cohen 1955, Fluorescent Antibody and Complement-Fixation Tests of Agents Isolated In Tissue Culture from Measles Patients:

The cellular degeneration characteristic of these “monkey-kidney agents” frequently appeared in our cultures, both in those inoculated with specimens from measles patients and in controls; hence cytologic criteria for recognition of measles agents were difficult to apply.

Von Magnus 1959, Studies on Measles Virus in Monkey Kidney Tissue Cultures:

However, monkey kidney viruses or “foamy agents,” may give rise to cellular degenerations which microscopically are indistinguishable from those caused by measles virus. For this reason the cytologic manifestations are of limited value[...]

They were all incredibly careful in their conclusions, even though they all confirmed, through their control experiments, that the cytopathic effect is present with and without pathogen present, thus invalidating the method. Then they went their merry ways (Enders even got a Noble prize for this) and no one caught on. It must have just slipped through peer review. Later, virologists just assumed cell culture is a valid way of isolating viruses.

From the start, virologists just assumed there had to be an invisible pathogen in their samples. They did not have an independent variable they could change to test if this was the cause of disease. They just took the cell cultures dying as confirmation that there is a pathogen in there. This is called the affirming the consequent fallacy, also known as correlation does not equal causation. They did not use the scientific method correctly, thus virology is technically a pseudoscience.

Electron microscopy pictures of viruses are nothing of the sort. They photograph structures that have not been biochemically characterized, their function is unknown. Samples are also modified heavily (dried, stained, fixed, frozen, cut etc). Pictures above and below so-called viruses are never published - you could see they're in reality microvilli and other normal cell structures, or parts of dying cells.

Sequencing is never done of the complete genome in one piece. They sequence the whole soup that is cell culture. There are multiple sources of DNA/RNA in there, including the nutrient medium (usually cow's blood) and the "infected" sample. There is always alignment involved, which is a computer guessing how the puzzle should be assembled. If you have enough genetic material and multiple ways to sort it, you can find basically anything. They usually look for "viruses" similar to known "viruses". These have been sequenced in the same way, making this endeavor circular reasoning. They never do control experiments at this step (which would be telling the computer to look for all sorts of "viruses" and also to try and assemble "virus" genomes from samples without "viruses" in it).

They had an extraordinary claim - that there are multiplying pathogenic particles too small to be visible under a light microscope. They failed to deliver the scientific evidence. Hence I stopped believing their claims.

TBoris · 2023-07-25T15:47:35Z

Richer So what of RNA viruses do they not exist? It is all cellular material? The whole model of viruses "infecting" cells and turning them into replication factories false? mRNA vaccines changing cells to create spike proteins how is that done?

Mcsnacks · 2023-07-25T20:19:48Z

Richer Common bacterial diseases include UTIs, food poisoning, STIs and some skin, sinus and ear infections Or are you thinking of Germs? .

When bacteria multiply they start releasing toxins in your body. Once these toxins build up you will get sick and die because you become septic and your organs shut down.

Mcsnacks · 2023-07-26T00:10:06Z

Richer Unless you are referring to how the definition of disease is applied as in: What counts as a disease also changes over historical time, partly as a result of increasing expectations of health, partly due to changes in diagnostic ability, but mostly for a mixture of social and economic reasons. One example is osteoporosis, which after being officially recognized as a disease by the WHO in 1994 switched from being an unavoidable part of normal ageing to a pathology). This has consequences for sufferers' sense of whether they are 'normally old' or 'ill', but more concretely for their ability to have treatment reimbursed by health service providers. Another well-known example is homosexuality, which has travelled in the opposite direction to osteoporosis, through medical territory, and out the other side. After being redefined during the nineteenth century as a state rather than an act, in the first half of the twentieth century homosexuality was viewed as an endocrine disturbance requiring hormone treatment. Later its pathological identity changed as it was re-categorized as an organic mental disorder treatable by electroshock and sometimes neurosurgery; and finally in 1974 it was officially de-pathologized,

Richer · 2023-07-27T12:59:29Z

TBoris There's just no hard scientific evidence for any of that. They found RNA sequences (to be precise they found parts of sequences - they don't even know if the sequence ever existed whole in nature, or if all there ever was is 'parts') but they don't know where they came from. They build models of how these packets of RNA (viruses) would look like, IF these sequences existed in whole and IF they were packed into a protein shell with spike (or other surface-) proteins. Then they looked in electron microscope pictures if they found structures that looked like these theoretical virus molecules, and they found such structures (but in reality they don't know what they are seeing, and they have no way of verifying because electron microscopy samples are denatured/dead and fixed). Likewise the docking on cells and injecting material, hijacking machinery of the cell - it's all theory built on theory of viruses. They only thing they can see is cells dying (inside and outside the body, in petri dishes) but they don't know why.

There is nothing but conjecture on how spike proteins work, too. It's not even clear if the vaccines' mRNA even gets body cells to produce spike protein, because all they do is measure spike proteins in injected people. They didn't look for them in unvaccinated people (but even then they could claim they got there through infection from vaccinated people). There is clear evidence that the fat shell that is used to transport the mRNA in the vaccines is harmful though, like polysorbate 80. This was known for many years before and they put it in other vaccines, too. So yes, I believe shedding too is a myth - the symptoms of unvaccinated people hanging out with vaccinated ones are psychological, as they are afraid of things like shedding and manifest their symptoms.

Mcsnacks · 2023-07-27T13:27:12Z

Richer They are found by cytopathic effects (CPEs) which are distinct observable cell abnormalities due to viral infection. This causes a viral disruption of the host genome and an altering of normal cells into transformed cells. There is also hemagglutination which is the agglutination (clumping) together of erythrocytes (red blood cells).

This is where you hear the term spike protein.Proteins or antibodies are then used to cause clumping and this is called HAI assays.

Viruses are isolated by infected host cells (eukaryotic or prokaryotic)that are cultured and grown, and then the growth medium can be harvested as a source of virus. Virions in the liquid medium can be separated from the host cells by either centrifugation or filtration. Filters can physically remove anything present in the solution that is larger than the virions; the viruses can then be collected in the filtrate.

The Modified Kirby-Bauer disc diffusion test method is used for bacteria isolation and identification in complex media.

Just because you don't understand microbiology doesn't mean the ones who do understand it are just making up what they want you to believe.

Richer · 2023-07-27T14:05:03Z

Mcsnacks You're talking about these causes of disease as if they were fact. If multiplying bacteria is a problem, do we know why they suddenly multiply? Are those bacteria said to cause a disease found in all affected by the disease and are they not found in healthy people?

This is sadly muddled by modern medicine, because they define many diseases by the presence of certain pathogens, even though many diseases have the exact same symptoms. Looking at the history of medicine, my conclusion is we had a very small amount of different symptoms, but a very large amount of potential pathogens. Categorizing them by pathogen made it possible to sell people countermeasures (medication) for every pathogen (instead of for every disease). All drugs have the potential to cause further symptoms (called side effects - I'd call them intended effects). Doctors then find the next pathogen associated with those symptoms, so you get prescribed more drugs, and so on.

D efining by pathogen also allows them to claim effectiveness of certain countermeasures. The prime example is polio, which is just generic paralysis. It was caused by DDT and other pesticides like lead arsenic, which is why it struck mainly in the summer. Later they introduced the polio vaccine, just in time for the ban on DDT. It did not quite work as smoothly as that, because polio was already waning by the time only very few people were vaccinated. The media still repeated ad infinitum that the vaccine did its job. In reality it also caused paralysis (among other things), but vaccine induce paralysis is defined as guillan barré syndrome, or any of the other labels like palsy, sclerosis etc. So the "success" of the polio vaccine was due to a combination of less toxic pesticides coupled with defining it away.

Same with the smallpox vaccine. Diseases with pockmarks did not vanish after smallpox was "eradicated". We still have those, just defined as being caused by other pathogens, like monkeypox, cowpox, or their milder forms like chickenpox, measles (even doctors admit they often have difficulty distinguishing those by symptoms alone).

Australia changed its definition of how rabies is diagnosed in animals to claim success on their rabies vaccine program for pets.

AIDS is defined differently in the west as in Africa. In Africa the symptoms pretty much overlap with malnourishment. Combined with a bogus test, it's a convenient excuse to pump people full of toxic drugs like AZT. If they die you can claim the disease caused it and they would have been worse off if they hadn't taken the stuff. To cement this view, they said we cannot do true controlled trials, because it would be 'unethical' to withhold potential treatment from sick people. How can we find out if the treatment is toxic then? We can't.

Mcsnacks · 2023-07-27T14:29:19Z

Richer There are many viruses and bacteria that animals aren't suceptible too and only humans are, these are called obligate intracellular pathogens.

Sometimes you must identify a gene that may cause the organism to be pathogenic. There are pathogenic strains of E. coli that don't cause harm until the acquisition of new genes happens.It does this when a phage or plasmid is added in which it then creates a toxin.

Mcsnacks · 2023-07-27T14:41:13Z

Richer Also it is depending on the route of transmission that determines what form a disease takes. Some that are inhaled germinate and cause death any other route and they can only cause illness because the gene (or genes) involved in pathogenesis is inactivated.

How many cells you come in contact with also determines illness. A single cell can cause sickness but others it can take upwards of a 100 cells needed to cause sickness.

Mcsnacks · 2023-07-27T14:48:04Z

Richer AIDS overlaps many sicknesses. AIDS is acquired autoimmune defiency meaning all it does is weaken your immune system so that it makes it easier to get sick with diseases like tuberculosis, infections and cancers.

Richer · 2023-07-27T14:55:45Z

Mcsnacks You don't understand virology. Refutation of most of your points is in my comment above..

There are at least the four publications that clearly refute CPE as a method for virus detection/isolation. They did control experiments and proved in every case that CPE in cell culture is caused by the experimental setup. This is what you do control experiments for.

There are explanations for everything that comes after, that don't require virus as an explanation. Everything that was actually observed, that is. It is no use talking about exclusively theoretical happenings like viruses entering cells, using them to replicate themselves until they burst. If that were the case we could surely isolate viruses directly from they body of sick people. Virologists confirm they cannot do it without the detour of cell culture. If asked why, they claim there is not enough virus in a sample to be able to be detected. This directly contradicts the viral replication theory "until cells burst".

Antibodies cause clumping, but they have never been established to be specific to a certain pathogen. Control experiments like trying different pathogens for clumping are never done. Antibody titers have widely varying results between people and stages of disease - they don't correlate with severity. Also there are people who have genetic impairment and can't produce antibodies, but they still don't always get sick.

Cell cultures contain host cells, infected sample material, growth medium (usually calf serum=blood), and a selection of antibiotics/antifungals. Also potential contaminants, from the lab, the researchers and the sample (like pollen and such if it's lung washings of an infected person). That means there are a lot of sources of genetic material in there. Centrifuging can produce a crude isolation of genetic material, but it's a mixture of all the sources. It also breaks down many of the strands into smaller fragments which have to be re-assembled into a whole.

If you don't know what genetic information you're looking for (imagine the first time they were looking for the sequence of a virus) and you have a gigantic amount of fragments available, you can not be sure any certain parts are of your theoretical construct. To get an idea how much material is available take the original covid virus isolation paper:[Link]

"In total, we generated 56,565,928 sequence reads that were de novo-assembled and screened for potential aetiological agents."

Having a lot of genetic material available also allows for assembly of (nearly) the same theoretical genome from multiple samples. The nearly in there is the key to why we have so many variants('mutations') of the covid virus. Different labs put different puzzle peaces together in only nearly the same way as the first sample. Assembly(putting together the puzzle peaces) is done via computer algorithm, and they also get slightly different results every time. They also skip controls at this step. They don't try to look for similarity of their genetic sequences to most viruses (they do for some, like in the covid paper they compared to sars1, among others). They usually don't repeat the assembly or employ different algorithms to see if the result is reproducible. They don't try to assemble the same virus from a sample of an uninfected person.

From the start they just assumed a virus was in the sample, and then confirmation biased themselves at every step.

The Modified Kirby-Bauer disc diffusion test method is used for bacteria isolation and identification in complex media.

Have bacteria been unambiguously shown to cause disease? You cannot define their mere presence as confirmation they are pathogenic. Logic like this leads to blaming firefighters for fire because you always find them where it's burning.

Richer · 2023-07-27T14:58:08Z

Mcsnacks You're just repeating standard medicine/microbiology factoids without thinking. Most of it is pure theory and much is theory built on theory.

Mcsnacks · 2023-07-27T15:12:30Z

Richer Yea i'm the one lacking understanding here. After you compared smallpox to other pox's. Smallpox has a name it's called variola and there are two types: major and minor. And belongs to the Poxviridae family

which contains 83 of them.

Now i'm sure that explanation was for naught because your understanding of biology is on the infantile stage but at least I try.

Mcsnacks · 2023-07-27T15:15:16Z

Richer And chickenpox is a herpesvirus not a poxvirus.

Richer · 2023-07-27T15:47:56Z

Mcsnacks You're only categorizing these diseases differently, because you think you know a pathogen for each one. The symptoms are general and unclear.

Even when the term “variola” first appeared it was not accompanied by a clinical description, and we have no way of knowing whether or not it referred to smallpox. For several hundred years after the introduction of the terms “variola” and “morbilli”, the diseases they refer to can in no certain way be distinguished as smallpox and measles, respectively, on the basis of the inadequate clinical descriptions. In the case of smallpox, the confusion with chicken-pox further clouds retrospective epidemiological considerations.[Link]

Can you distinguish [Link]
It's not like doctors found it ever easy to distinguish the poxes until bogus testing came in.

“The name “chickenpox” was used by Richard Morton (1637-1698) who characterized it as a mild form of smallpox.”

Since the early symptoms of smallpox and chickenpox are quite similar, and smallpox itself is not universally fatal, it’s not surprising that the viruses were easily confused.

Richard Morton described chickenpox as a milder version of smallpox.

At the time, however, even physicians, had trouble telling the difference. In one famous account of William Osler’s skills as a diagnostician, he was called in to show his students what had been pronounced by several distinguished physicians at Johns Hopkins to be a severe case of chickenpox in an adult male. Interested, he gathered 30 or 40 students and doctors, and went to take a look. When the hapless resident pulled back the sheets to reveal the patient’s symptoms, a horrified Dr Osler exclaimed, “My God, Futcher, don’t you know smallpox when you see it?”

(was he actually better at distinguishing them if nobody else could?)

The chicken-pox and swine-pox differ, I believe, only in name [Link]

Shingles has a long recorded history, but physicians and scientists were unable to distinguish this particular disease from blistering caused by smallpox, ergotism, and erysipelas.

Chickenpox and shingles are two infectious diseases that are often confused with one another.[Link]

The shingles virus causes an outbreak of a red rash and blisters across the face and body, like many other skin conditions— psoriasis, allergies, eczema, and hives among them.[Link]

The exact origin of the term “varicella” is also uncertain. Vogel referred to chickenpox as varicella in 1765. Some authors suggested that “varicella” is the derivative of “varus”, the Latin word for “pimple”. It is also possible that varicella comes from the diminutive form of the word variola, derived from the medieval Latin word for smallpox which means “speckled.”

Mcsnacks · 2023-07-27T17:20:19Z

Richer To overcome these challenges, molecular methods can be used in conjunction with virus cell culture to provide more accurate and rapid diagnoses. This approach is termed ‘pre-CPE’ diagnosis.

Pre-CPE methods have the capacity to detect the virus post cell-entry, but before the cells present CPE, meaning they generally provide faster results. Coverslips obtained from shell vial cultures can be used directly for pre-CPE methods. Detection is usually facilitated by staining of the coverslip with an agent which detects a virus-associated protein with high sensitivity and specificity.

Mcsnacks · 2023-07-27T17:55:05Z

Richer They both have "pox" in their names because they cause pockmark skin lesions. But swinepox is caused by a virus similar to smallpox, while a type of herpesvirus causes chickenpox.

Mcsnacks · 2023-07-27T18:36:50Z

Richer Chickenpox and shingles are two illnesses caused by the varicella-zoster virus.

Mcsnacks · 2023-07-27T21:26:57Z

Richer And where CPE can't be used, then a reporter construct becomes the reporter gene. Fluorescent proteins and enzymes such as beta-galactosidase or luciferase can serve as reporter genes.

Mcsnacks · 2023-07-27T21:38:20Z

Richer Smallpox is of the species variola virus. Family poxvirus, genus orthopoxvirus.

Chickenpox is of the species varicella-zoster virus (Family herpesvirus). Only one serotype of VZV is known, and humans are the only reservoir.

Mcsnacks · 2023-07-27T21:43:25Z

Richer Smallpox not being universally fatal still caused a 30% death rate. In addition, the disease often left survivors with large areas of scarring and, sometimes, blindness.

Mcsnacks · 2023-07-27T21:57:40Z

Richer Specimens from patients are also likely to contain other viruses, so it is critical to determine if a virus growing in the culture is really the target coronavirus. Researchers confirm the source of infection by extracting genetic material from the virus in culture and sequencing its genome.

They compare the sequence to known coronavirus sequences to identify it precisely.

Because viruses can't reproduce by themselves (without a host), viruses are not considered living. Nor do viruses have cells: they're very small, much smaller than the cells of living things, and are basically just packages of nucleic acid and protein.

TBoris · 2023-07-28T14:35:01Z

Mcsnacks After reading all this... I have to give Richer points on his point that ID of a virus is not precise at all:

Coronavirus - Creating the illusion of a pandemic through diagnostic tests

In this article, I'll present quotes from official sources about their own diagnostic test for the coronavirus. I'm talking about fatal flaws in the test. Because case numbers are based on those...

Artex · 2023-07-28T14:36:42Z

TBoris Especially since PCR is explicitly not appropriate for diagnostics, according to the person who won the Nobel Prize for it's development.

Mcsnacks · 2023-07-28T14:47:23Z

TBoris Even on the smallest chance even tho with technology advancements they can ID a virus 100%, it's not precise you still know people are getting the symptoms.

Recent advances in targeted gene perturbation, high-throughput screening, and mass spectrometry have facilitated the discovery of virus receptors in recent years. Focussing on genomic- and interactome-based approaches have been successes.

[Link]

Mcsnacks · 2023-07-28T14:57:05Z

Artex Dr Lawrence invented Listerine to be sold as a floor cleaner, deodorant, and even a remedy for diseases. And said that it was too dangerous to be used orally.

Artex · 2023-07-28T15:24:56Z

Mcsnacks That could be because the original surgical antiseptic it was based upon was made with carbolic acid, so I'm going to need a citation on that. Listerine was considered powerful enough that it was only sold to dentists until 1914. But anyway, that's a non-sequitur since we're talking about a test which only tests for presence and not about a drug or treatment.

Kary Mullis gave very specific reasons PCR shouldn't be used diagnostically. It's used to amplify DNA, which only tells you it's there, not if you have an active infection or will develop one. Someone could carry mycobacterium tuberculosis their entire lives and never develop TB and never give it to someone else, but a pathologist could find and treat them for having the bacterium. For what purpose?

And it's quite convenient Mullis died right before the start of the pandemic, though plenty of people pointed out PCR was being mis-used right from the start.

Breast cancer is over-diagnosed based on the presence of tumors, which are often benign. And the treatment of benign tumors does more harm than good to those patients while being incredibly profitable for the doctors. Same thing with prostate cancer.

Mcsnacks · 2023-07-28T15:26:58Z

Richer Yea that's how science works. These theories grew out of the collective work of many scientists.

Mcsnacks · 2023-07-28T16:28:29Z

Artex [Link]
[Link]

Mcsnacks · 2023-07-28T16:38:19Z

Artex Benign tumors require treatment when they impact quality of life or other functions like a benign tumor called an acoustic neuroma, the tumor pushes against the auditory nerve, which leads to hearing problems and balance issues. Also fibroids which are made of connective tissue and often form in the uterus. They lead to bleeding, bladder problems and pelvic pain. Depending upon their location, they can have serious impacts.

Mcsnacks · 2023-07-28T16:44:08Z

Artex Dr Mullis never said PCR testing does not work tho or that it only identifies the DNA or RNA of the person being tested.

He said "Quantitative PCR is an oxymoron” within the context of testing viral load (the amount of virus present) in people with HIV. This doesn’t mean he thought PCR testing didn’t work at all, but that there are limitations in detecting the specific levels of a virus from a sample using PCR testing. You can't find out about the exact levels of a virus in a sample, not whether or not the sample contained the virus.

He was 75. That's more than the average life expectancy.

Mcsnacks · 2023-07-28T16:49:16Z

Artex You would treat the TB because you're not a fortune teller. You don't know if it's not going to affect them or anyone else so you err on the side of precaution.

Artex · 2023-07-28T18:38:08Z

Mcsnacks Your links don't support:

And said that it was too dangerous to be used orally.

benign bĭ-nīn′ (adjective) - Of no danger to health; not malignant or disease-causing.

the tumor pushes against the auditory nerve, which leads to hearing problems and balance issues.

Then it's not benign.

Dr Mullis never said PCR testing does not work tho or that it only identifies the DNA or RNA of the person being tested.

I never said he said it doesn't work. But he did say that it was not appropriate as a diagnostic tool.

"Quantitative PCR is an oxymoron” within the context of testing viral load

That's what I said. It can't be used quantitatively because it amplifies the DNA. That's the ENTIRE point. The more cycles you run, the more DNA there is to read. That makes it completely inappropriate as a diagnostic tool.

I've been watching you go back and forth with Richer for days now. It's clear you know just enough to search for articles that have words you think support your argument, but you have very little understanding of what you think you're talking about. You're so defensive you can't even recognize the points you and Richer agree on, and you came back to me with links and statements that support everything I said while stating that it refutes what I said.

It's fine to disagree, but you might start to ask yourself what you win if people stop arguing with you. And it's more important to come to a mutual understanding of the positions in an argument. Richer and others 100% understand your position, but I haven't seen you make any effort to explore what they're saying, since their arguments are counter to mainstream, and your responses have been "deny, deny, deny." The things you support have been explored, and the things you're denying have enough merit that they're worth exploring, unless you think (as many have in the past) that we're close to knowing all we need to know.

Until we know that "junk" DNA is for or from whence consciousness arises, we're far from understanding the nature of reality. Maybe you should practice a little more skepticism toward the things you're sure you know.

Mcsnacks · 2023-07-29T02:28:21Z

Artex [Link]
[Link]

And this is why the doctor who invented Listerine didn't want it used orally.

Mcsnacks · 2023-07-29T02:31:10Z

Artex There hasn't been "junk" DNA since 2012 when scientists figured out that DNA contains the vital instructions that switch genes on and off in all kinds of different cells.

Mcsnacks · 2023-07-29T02:51:59Z

Artex I have explored what they are saying. It's illogical and goes against the scientific method. Their observations conflict with their expectations. They fall for statistical manipulations, such as correlation and regression. The measurements they use demand the use of operational definitions of relevant quantities. If one wants to use correlation it must be with a mathematical model in order to prove high percentage outcomes affected.

But all they have in the end is to attack the very object that has already been accepted as fact and has definition. Or they have been fooled by because someone applies a definition that doesn't have relevance like saying a virus isn't biological because it's not alive. But this is only because it doesn't become cellular until it has a host.

Mcsnacks · 2023-07-29T03:27:55Z

Artex Oh and the main reason to not explore their arguments is that they are all hypocrites. They talk about all the evils and wrongs being done by people, corporations and government. But they financially support all of them. And if it wasn't avoidable I would understand but it is avoidable. The reason they don't avoid doing it is because it is difficult and they want easy. They don't like covid vaccines but do they avoid buying products those companies make, of course not. And I know this because vaccines make up less than 10% of the pharmaceuticals companies revenue which means the other 90% is things like aspirin, tylenol, band-aids, toothpaste or deodorant they produce and sell. Don't like Bill Gates but they buy and use Microsoft products everyday. How much stuff do they buy that comes from China where slave labor makes alot of that stuff? Don't like what the government does but pays and supports them by paying taxes. And don't say taxes aren't avoidable because they are but that's too hard for them. If the rich can avoid paying taxes then so can anyone. I haven't paid any taxes in 7 years. And I don't receive any money from the government, or electricity, or water.

Mcsnacks · 2023-07-29T04:04:47Z

Artex You said- "It can't be used quantitatively because it amplifies the DNA. That's the ENTIRE point. The more cycles you run, the more DNA there is to read. That makes it completely inappropriate as a diagnostic tool." .

The DNA or RNA has to be amplified due to the size of what is being searched for.

When using qPCR for the final readout, a smaller amplicon is selected to ensure accurate quantification at each cycle. Ideally a qPCR amplicon size ranges from 75 to 200 bases in length, unless design restrictions take the primers beyond this range. In reality, the fragment size may be determined by consideration of several factors, including the biology under consideration.Ideally, assays for the determination of the presence or quantity of a mRNA target are located over an exon–exon junction to avoid detection of contaminating gDNA sequence.

Most, but not all, DNA is eliminated from the sample during RNA purification. To avoid DNA amplification during RT-qPCR, it is advisable to select primers that either flank a large intron that is not present in the mRNA sequence or that span an exon-exon junction.

When attempting to quantify multiple targets using qPCR, the amplicons should be as similar as possible to avoid amplification bias.

Mcsnacks · 2023-07-29T04:09:48Z

Artex Here's what benign tumors are:

[Link]

[Link]

parzival · 2023-07-29T13:22:58Z

Artex For your consideration [Link] [Link]

Mcsnacks · 2023-07-29T15:14:54Z

parzival Jesus Christ. People will believe anything nowadays. Where are the logical thinkers? If there was a massive campaign to turn people into zombies they wouldn't do it by vaccinations. All they have to do is legalize heroin and pain medications(oxycontin). You would have over a billion zombies by next week. And they would make a hell of a lot more money doing it that way.

It is not difficult to stop overpopulation if world leaders want to do it. The world leaders can't be stopped, it's that simple. They control to much and as long as the path isn't too uncomfortable the people will follow. And they will follow a lot easier if they are able to not feel responsible,hence creating a narrative. A narrative that doesn't even have to make sense. Like the Ukraine/Russia narrative. So if Russia set one foot into Poland, Nato and the 26 countries in it would attack and stop them. But Ukraine who is an ally of Nato and the 26,that also supplies the world with a good bit of its grain consumption can be over ran,bombed out, millions killed and displaced because of Russia and no response. You would think that would show the Ukrainians who their real friends are and it isn't Nato. It seems Ukraine forgot about this:

Assistant Secretary of Defense Graham Allison, said that “Ukraine’s security problem will be solved once Ukraine gives up its nuclear arsenal.” Our destruction of Ukraine’s conventional weaponry also was “for the safety of the Ukrainian people,” urged then-Sen. Barack Obama in 2005. Bahahahaha. Narrative changes and no one questions it.

TBoris · 2023-07-30T01:45:29Z

parzival

The world leaders can't be stopped, it's that simple.

It isn't that simple I think. Every bot that calls me on the phone gets hung up on. So there is always hope.

Mcsnacks · 2023-07-30T03:29:19Z

TBoris Grant me the courage not to give up what I think is right even though I think it is hopeless.

parzival · 2023-07-30T09:02:47Z

TBoris This character reminds me of the artist who kept devoting himself to inventing better and better ways of sharpening pencils. He never created anything, but he had the sharpest pencils in town... I also reminded that "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines." -Ralph Waldo Emerson, from his essay "Self Reliance" (1841).

Point being that little minds tend to devise solutions that work within the laws of the problems they are designed to correct. Their solutions, in other words, tend to be foolishly consistent with the problem.

Mcsnacks · 2023-07-30T20:56:28Z

TBoris This character reminds me of that guy Corky from Life goes on Tv show.

A wise man can learn more from a foolish question than a fool can learn from a wise answer. Bruce Lee

Point being the person who thinks people considers him a fool does everything he can to improve and gain more knowledge. The person who thinks people consider him wise never seeks to improve or gain more knowledge and he will always be content with what he already believes he knows.Whenever you talk sense to a fool, he will call you foolish.

TBoris · 2023-08-01T15:42:04Z

Mcsnacks and et al. So here is the "wisdom" I got from reading through this verbiage originally started off from Richer's great comment (in my opinion):

1) Viruses and bacteria do exist, but alone they do not cause disease in an organism. In other words, you can die with Covid but you can't die from it.

2) Vaccines can and do (regardless of being 'approved' by the Fraud and Death Administration) cause harm including death but not necessarily immediately.

3) A combination of increasing central control and depopulation programs funded by the globalists(who control the money supply) do exist in our reality and are happening, and made easier with advancements in technology.

Mcsnacks · 2023-08-01T16:14:13Z

TBoris Viruses are simply packets of nucleic acid, either DNA or RNA, surrounded by a protein shell and sometimes fatty materials called lipids. Outside a living cell, a virus is a dormant particle, lacking the raw materials for reproduction. Only when it enters a host cell does it go into action, hijacking the cell’s metabolic machinery to produce copies of itself that may burst out of infected cells or simply bud off a cell membrane. This lack of self-sufficiency means that viruses cannot be cultured in artificial media for scientific research or vaccine development; they can be grown only in living cells, fertilized eggs, tissue cultures, or bacteria.

Bacteria have evolved many different behaviors over a wide range of habitats, learning to adhere to cells, make paralyzing poisons and other toxins, evade or suppress our bodies’ defenses, and resist drugs and the immune system’s antibodies. Bacterial infections are associated with diseases such as strep throat, tuberculosis, staph skin infections, and urinary tract and bloodstream infections.

A pathogen is used to describe an infectious microorganism or agent, such as a virus or bacterium.

Microorganisms capable of causing disease—pathogens—usually enter our bodies through the mouth, eyes, nose, or urogenital openings, or through wounds or bites that breach the skin barrier.

Pathogenic microbes challenge the immune system in many ways. Viruses make us sick by killing cells or disrupting cell function.

Bacteria make us sick the same way, but they also have other strategies at their disposal. Sometimes bacteria multiply so rapidly they crowd out host tissues and disrupt normal function. Sometimes they kill cells and tissues outright. Sometimes they make toxins that can paralyze, destroy cells’ metabolic machinery, or precipitate a massive immune reaction that is itself toxic.

Mcsnacks · 2023-08-01T16:26:51Z

TBoris The CDC considers the underlying cause of death as “the condition that began the chain of events that ultimately led to the person’s death.

Mcsnacks · 2023-08-01T16:29:35Z

TBoris Vaccines help the body learn how to defend itself from disease without the dangers of a full-blown infection.

Mcsnacks · 2023-08-01T16:38:24Z

TBoris Do you know what is the number 1 and 2 causes of depopulation? Education and Job opportunities. Which is why the only countries that have population increasing are 3rd world or poor. If you don't believe in depopulation then you have to be ok with open borders so there won't be so many living in poverty since those are where the increases are happening.

DeliciousTears · 2023-08-01T16:42:11Z

TBoris Highly compromised people did die "from" the coof. Their sats would crash while they sat there often talking and not appearing in typical ards style stress. Likely from microclotting in the lungs or some other interference with o2 binding.

I live with non-Covidians who saw it happen and symptoms were unlike anything they'd ever seen prior. Of course the ventilation protocols absolutely killed many more who would have otherwise (and later did) survive with typical bipap/o2 on high-flow. High-flow was originally not allowed because some asshole convinced the retarded hospital admins that it would "spread the virus". Of course once you had 20 coof patients in the ER, you're already saturated in it.

Whatever it was did kill the very frail/feeble elderly and particularly hit the obese in that group.

No hospital staff were ever killed or seriously hospitalized with it although they all got it eventually and brought it home those first few months....

And it was never a huge deal with piles of bodies. The medical people in my family called it similar to a bad flu season and nothing more.

TBoris · 2023-08-01T17:46:06Z

DeliciousTears The spread (of disease) belief system (I am a spreader living or someone else living is a spreader) needs to end in my opinion. It is an enabler of fear and control. And even if it can be true, it should not be allowed as an excuse for control purposes period (I think). So in other words, there should be no mandate to vax up or take a faulty diagnostic test let alone wear a mask. Now if one chooses to do so for their own protection, I don't have a problem with that.

Richer · 2023-08-01T22:24:34Z

Mcsnacks I'm repeating myself here, because you haven't tried to logically understand any of my points or refute any of them. You either have amazing imagination, or are parroting modern medicine and institutions like the CDC.

"Viral" DNA or RNA from samples has never been biochemically characterized. We don't know if it's from a virus or any other thing in the sample. That's because no virus has ever been isolated (you could sequence it directly then). No virus particle on its own has ever been sequenced, they're always just indirectly "found" by PCR.

No virus has ever been directly isolated from e.g. lung washings of a person sick with a respiratory virus. It is supposed to multiply in lung cells until they burst, releasing a large amount of viruses, right? The lung is basically a culture. Why do they need in vitro cell culture to find the virus then?

There is no experiment where bacteria by itself have been introduced into a living host and they produced disease. In experiments that sound like they did, they never use pure bacteria and usually don't do controls (to be able to exclude the experimental setup is causing the symptoms).

For example the guy who got a nobel prize for demonstrating helicobacter pylori cause stomach ulcers by ingesting them himself. He demonstrated nothing of the sort. If you actually read what he did, he had a petri dish containing the bacteria, mixed it with beef extract (nutrient medium), and ingested the whole thing. He had no symptoms for three days, then becaume nauseous, apparently had bad breath and vomited. He waited three more days and then took antibiotics. A gastroscopy resulted in the diagnosis of acute gastritis ("which may lead to ulcers"). That's it.

No information on what else was in the petri dish. What else did he eat and drink in all this time. What else did he do. No controls to see if ingesting contents of petri dishes and beef extract can cause vomiting. Sample size of one. Self-reported. On top of it all he didn't even get an ulcer, just an upset stomach. This is the kind of bullshit you have to sift through, because everyone always just parrots the headlines and synopses without looking in the damn text.

This is why I was precise in saying: No bacteria or virus has ever unequivocally been shown to cause disease. On top of that viruses have not unequivocally been shown to exist at all.

Mcsnacks · 2023-08-01T23:33:11Z

Richer How is bringing up a scientist from the 1600's a point? Because your point couldn't be that distinguishing viruses isn't possible because they couldn't do it in the 1600's. Or is it your point saying that testing for viruses is bogus because of some illogical reasoning of likeness to another pathogen? Which couldn't be a point because their are a multitude of ways to test and find pathogenic viruses and distinguish them. And I said there's a Pre-CPE method because you said CPE didn't work. Then I said they can use what's called reporter cells. That's all your weak points refuted.

Mcsnacks · 2023-08-01T23:50:35Z

Richer You also have single-virus tracking in live cells allows researchers to follow the fate of individual virus particles, to probe dynamic interactions between viruses and the cellular machinery, and to dissect the infection process into fundamental steps so that the molecular mechanisms underlying each step can be determined.

Viral pathogenesis is how viruses cause disease within a host.

Microscopes are used to see the damage viruses do to our cells. We call this “cytopathic effect”, and comparing infected cells to uninfected ones enables us to detect the presence of viruses in a sample.An indirect way of visualising viruses is to use antibodies (much like the ones your body makes in response to infection) to tag viruses with fluorescent molecules that give off light when they absorb certain types of radiation. We can even tag multiple things (such as virus and cellular components) with different colours so we can track more than one at the same time.

Recent advances in fluorescent microscopy have led to the development of super resolution microscopy, which combines very clever physics with computational methods to produce clear images that reveal highly detailed structures in cells.

Using this technique for virology can pinpoint areas of an infected cell with more accuracy. For instance, it can show exactly where inside the cell viruses are located, and what specific parts of cellular machinery viruses use to replicate.

Electron microscopy is used to visually investigate different stages of virus infection inside cells. Electron microscopy can also be used to visualise whole virus particles.

Evaluating the structure of the exterior of virus particles is also a great tool for identifying which antibodies can neutralise a virus, which can help produce more precise and effective vaccines.

TBoris · 2023-08-02T01:41:36Z

Mcsnacks

Do you know what is the number 1 and 2 causes of depopulation? Education and Job opportunities. Which is why the only countries that have population increasing are 3rd world or poor. If you don't believe in depopulation then you have to be ok with open borders so there won't be so many living in poverty since those are where the increases are happening.

No...The number 1 and 2 causes of depopulation are: 1 poisoning (including the mind through false Education) and 2 sterilization programs. The US population is increasing because of immigration. The borders are not open they are navigated by cartels/private equity firms like Black Rock to provide cheap labor within the US.

Mcsnacks · 2023-08-02T01:44:00Z

Richer How come your examples of medicine are over 40 years old? So your smoking gun is what happened in 1981? You might want to sit down before i say this but we have done a lot of advancing since then.

Mcsnacks · 2023-08-02T02:50:59Z

TBoris The decline in birth rates in the US has also been observed in most developed countries around the world. With the fertility rate being below the 2.1-births-per-woman replacement rate. [Link]

[Link]

U.S. population growth has nearly flatlined, new census data shows. [Link]

TBoris · 2023-08-02T04:24:02Z

Mcsnacks

U.S. population growth has nearly flatlined, new census data shows.

I guess the depopulation programs are working despite the immigration: [Link]

Mcsnacks · 2023-08-02T06:50:57Z

TBoris As women have gained more access to education and contraception, and as the anxieties associated with having children continue to intensify, more parents are delaying pregnancy and fewer babies are being born.

TBoris · 2023-08-02T12:21:02Z

Mcsnacks

As women have gained more access to education and contraception, and as the anxieties associated with having children continue to intensify, more parents are delaying pregnancy and fewer babies are being born.

More access to false education and sterilizing contraception along with social engineering for the anxieties. Also targeted for the depopulation are the old and unemployed which are upside down on their production vs. their consumption(deceivingly presented as the "green foot print"). Once those "useless" consumers are killed off(or as they are dying off), the globalists back fill them with immigration guised as "open boarders" and "illegals" for political purposes. It isn't just cheap labor being brought in. It is also replacements for the aging "over consumption" populations being killed off. The immigrants are often grateful to who helped them get to America or England etc.. Then depopulation programs are targeted on those poor (or war torn) countries after the cream of the crop is skimmed off.

Artex · 2023-08-02T13:19:24Z

TBoris Richer You're playing chess with a pigeon. You said it yourself:

I'm repeating myself here, because you haven't tried to logically understand any of my points or refute any of them. You either have amazing imagination or are parroting modern medicine and institutions like the CDC.

At this point, in part because McSnacks responds to each point with a separate reply (rather than learning how to format a single cogent response), in part because it's replying with 100% pharma-insurance-hospital (the trifecta conspirators raising healthcare costs and retarding health progress since the early 20th century) consensus talking points, ignoring anything that wouldn't support its argument even though I know from working in healthcare for many years nothing it says is gospel and everything it says is up for debate, I'm not sure it isn't a bot.

It also doesn't help that it responds like a 20 year old who thinks they know everything because they haven't developed expertise in anything yet and believe everything they read, having not enough information to recognize when science communicators get it 100% wrong. It rarely links to actual abstracts, repeats sensationalized reports, and has a level of certitude that cannot be taken seriously without some serious bona fides behind it.

Regurgitating science-y news does not an expert make. In fact, it makes one dumber. First thing I do when I see some exciting new science news is look up the actual abstract, and very often you find the actual findings have been manipulated to be "truthy" but not "truthful" to sell more ads since our entire economy is ad-driven and big pharma buys more ad time on MSM news stations than anywhere else, as well as purchasing advertising masquerading as news on shows like 60 Minutes and Dateline.

TBoris · 2023-08-02T14:30:07Z

Artex Good points! I think that recognizing bots is going to become increasingly more difficult in the years ahead. In addition to the bots, Intel agencies and behavioral scientists (real humans) are all over this site practicing their wares for more advanced narratives to keep us intellectuals "useful" for control purposes of the masses (IMHO). Probably tweaking the bots algorithms and pattern recognizes as well. But despite all that, we "keep calm and carry on" as Churchill (the rational psycho) would say. Thanks for being non bot Artex.

DeliciousTears · 2023-08-02T15:55:59Z

Artex "All your base are belong to us."

-OG bot

There are very few automated "bots" infiltrating these sites. There are literally tens of thousands of actual humans now paid to push whatever narrative they're told. Not saying anything about Mcsnacks 'cause I'm really not following too many of these threads..

Artex · 2023-08-02T15:58:02Z

DeliciousTears If it talks like a bot and walks like a bot... Maybe NPC is the more apt term?

ReRan · 2023-08-02T16:25:08Z

Artex I think it is a bot, just from the mechanical way it forms sentences.

Mcsnacks · 2023-08-02T20:17:10Z

TBoris The largest population increases are in Africa which doesn't have enough resources to feed them. Why would the globalists want immigrants? That makes no sense. Why wouldn't they want to fill the positions with robots and advanced technology or AI? Human replacement no matter how cheap is illogical.

What's wrong with wanting a planet were people aren't starving or forced to live in polluted areas? It's irresponsible and cruel to continue to increase our future childrens problems. Geez have a heart.

Mcsnacks · 2023-08-02T20:48:34Z

[[Artex] The links you put in are ad driven. That's everything on the internet. It doesn't pertain to only MSM or big pharma.

Compared to what it spends on R&D(Research and Development) Pharma’s spend on TV ads is pretty minor.

Reading Science-y abstracts when one doesn't have a degree in it doesn't make one an expert on it. And it's obvious how well you are able to understand it.

It doesn't help having to respond to people as if they were children since they have a child like understanding which is why I reply in singular points in order to not confuse. Since one can tell that the readers of my replies already have trouble understanding data points and logical deductions.

Mcsnacks · 2023-08-02T20:58:36Z

ReRan The reason I sound like a bot is because I don't use emotions in conversation and like bots I know facts and statistics. [Link]

Laypeople think that intelligent people may be lacking in traits related to agreeableness, particularly, trust, honesty and obedience to social rules. This is in spite of the fact that these traits are also considered socially desirable. Other research has found that people who consider themselves to be highly intelligent also tend to be disagreeable. This suggests that according to lay beliefs smart people are not necessarily nice and that stereotypes about intelligence are not completely socially desirable. Perhaps intelligence and socially desirable personality traits serve different functions, which sometimes conflict with each other.

Mcsnacks · 2023-08-02T21:02:59Z

Artex Bot- a machine capable of carrying out a complex series of actions. Disapproving of someone who does things in a very effective way but never shows their emotions:

Sounds like compliments to me.

DeliciousTears · 2023-08-03T01:24:29Z

Artex NPC would be a triple masked 7 times shanked + Ukraine flag owner.... There are a lot of accounts run by actual humans designed simply to irritate/derail conversations. Trolls, paid or simply doing it for kicks... Not Bots, nor NPC's.

Fool on the Hill · 2023-08-03T09:49:35Z

TBoris Lol! Anyone who disagrees with me is a Russian….oh wait, now it’s an AI bot! And Winston Churchill was an evil POS. However, I do like your way of questioning things.

Agent Mulder · 2023-07-16T19:15:20Z

The massive increase and "outbreak" of std's during coldvid scamdemic is well documented.

Its in every state, hospitals, dr offices, clinics. All track and report on this.

The info is easily obtained

Yet this info has been completely ignored. Just like Influenza was during coldvid scamdemic.

Artex · 2023-07-17T17:31:25Z

Huh. Tens of thousands flee California for Houston, TX. Syphilis outbreak ensues.

ReRan ·

Artex Good point!

· 2023-07-18T20:52:59Z

Artex · 2023-07-19T13:06:35Z

ReRan Perhaps. But it's a better comedy bit than correlative observation.

ReRan · 2023-07-19T14:53:51Z

Artex Yeah, I got that.

VonCraq · 2023-07-19T01:11:10Z

Explain the article lead in picture...a medical with a star of David on his back?

Wth, is this picture from Israel??

PedroCarpintero · 2023-07-19T01:44:00Z

I contracted an “STD” last year, even though I was not having sex at the time... and no, I have not been vaccinated... the only physical explanation is that I contracted it soon after borrowing my friend's bar of soap that he was going to chuck out... it was proof enough for me that not all STDs are necessarily sexually transmitted... (sadly, the very cute young woman I was just starting to get to know and at the point of getting intimate with at the time was not quite convinced!)

Yet again, there could be another explanation...

There is a great book out there and more people should know about: The Healing Power of Illness, by Thorwald Dethlefsen and Rüdiger Dahlke. They break down the psychological roots behind a lot of illness'... in relation to STDs, they explain that it is a sign that one has hidden sexual fears, unconsciously afraid of sex, or worried of having performance issues... and this unspoken “truth” then speaks out for itself, in the form of a 'sexually transmitted' disease. Myself reaching middle age, plus being a life-long bachelor, suddenly with a much younger and very cute companion that was besotted with me, that certainly was the case for me... I tried my best to be confident and cool, but really, deep inside, I now can admit that I was terrified!

I think a lot of illness' really start in the psychology... In that sense, this article makes me question what kind of sexual fears are being drilled into people... and most of all, women. Any people from Houston reading this? Any obvious cultural changes happening to the city?

Buffalo_Ken · 2023-07-19T02:21:47Z

PedroCarpintero - I think the potential mate you mention might realize later her mistake in not giving you the benefit of the doubt, but being that she didn't apparently, odds are she is not the kind of potential mate that would have continuity for the two of you.....so really - what is the value of momentary pleasure if there is no continuity in the relationship. I'm sure somebody else is out there who might come along and be a better fit for you directly.

As for sexually transmitted diseases your anecdote is an exception I believe - typically an STD only is realized after close sexual contact during actions of intimacy involving this crevice and that.

Now if you want to get all "germ theory" versus "terrain theory" on it, I don't disagree that the mindset of an individual must play a large role in susceptibility to anything that might harm balance, but triggering organisms even if not virus per-se probably play a role as well. Most of the time moderation is advisable, and sorry about the young girl who decided against pursuing relations with you. Still, from her perspective, you can't entirely blame her can you - and maybe it just wasn't meant to be.

Odds are there were other incompatibilities that only would have emerged later, so maybe you ought be happy you got the STD from the bar of soap. Probably in the future it might be advisable to just make your own soap or buy some fresh versus using it from friends who seem to be "germy" based on your anecdote.

(ha, ha).

Ken

Buffalo_Ken · 2023-07-19T02:27:00Z

PedroCarpintero - do you remember the time you gave me some unsolicited advice about sexual positions between a male and female? Oh my goodness, can you imagine?

DeliciousTears · 2023-07-19T02:37:33Z

PedroCarpintero Which STD? A lot of those std screening blood tests are notorious for false positives.

PedroCarpintero · 2023-07-19T06:32:40Z

Buffalo_Ken Hi BK. Thanks for your perspective on things. Well, they say have the truth is a complete lie, and I also only told half the story (to not turn it into some Tarrantino film plot)... We broke up, I moved away, we both had our own process' in the meantime... She visited her psychic friend, to see if I was lying or telling the truth (she was tormented by not giving me the benefit of the doubt), and the psychic advised her to trust me, and trust her heart. In very recent times, we are now finally seeing one another again! Nevertheless, the 'question' often slips back into conversation, as a delicate wound that has never fully healed. Also on my side, during that time, I don't know if it was the soap that caused the problem, or maybe she was touching other men in the meantime... so equally, I have had my doubts. My friend whose soap it was had a history of getting drunks and visiting brothels, so I'm pretty sure it came via the soap.

Just as a baby receives all the impressions of its experiences, and that forms its character later on, the very same thing happens with relationships: all the bad moments, wrong words, false accusations, judgements, they all come back to haunt the relationship like a later-life psychosis... But me knowing my innocence, and us both knowing that we go together so well, we are eventually finding a way to overcome such an issue... The relationship is certainly more difficult, and not like anything it used to be. The energy does not fully rise and transform itself if there are emotional blocks and ongoing insecurities stealing the energy from the heart, so we are having to face our doubts and fears, in order for the relationship to get up on its feet again. It's the kind of relationship, like having once put your back out, and it gets half healed, enough to stand up and live... but one false move, the relationship is back on the floor in agony again. One has to have complete attention with every moment and movement, in order to not fall into unconscious habits that make the back go out again. A great relationship if one wants to wake up... but a terrible relationship if one wants to fall in slumber and vegetate.

(I try to be aphoristic with my explanations, as my first comment, and that often means we leave out the other side of the coin)...

Unsolicited advice is a regular flaw of mine, so that particular bit of unsolicited advice is probably lost amongst the life-long avalanche of such advice that I've dished out over the years... I give unsolicited advice on an hourly basis (isn't that what the comments section is all about?)... If I remember correctly, we weren't necessarily talking about positions from the kama sutra per se, but more of an energetic 'woman taking charge'... I think I tried to say (though I don't know how it was interpreted), it doesn't matter physically if a woman is in control or not, on top or under or in front or to the side... what is important is that a man is in control of himself energetically, or psychologically... In terms of man being the 'dominant one' in a relationship, I interpret that to mean that the man should be the one dominating himself, not him dominating the woman... a man that is able to do that, can let the woman 'dominate him' physically... after all, he is still allowing her to dominate him... Was that it? I don't mean that a man should pretend to be 'alpha' or pretend to be something he is not... he just has to be himself, know himself, to the point that he is able to control and transform his emotions at will. To put things in perspective, I gave you that unsolicited advice before meeting a younger beautiful woman! Certainly, the cute young woman in question has helped me realise that, on some level, I have been completely terrified of cute young women! (Which often goes unnoticed when we're fully clothed.)

I've only recently started having 'successful' relationships (or relationships, to be more precise, which to me is something of a success, even if they do fail at the end)... I've adopted the discipline of never judging my partner... I destroyed my younger life loves due to being too judgemental towards my partners, and after decades of suffering being single, I've managed to drill that teaching deep into me... Still, occasionally, a judgement slips out of my mouth in the form of a 'harmless joke', and that often requires a few minutes, hours, or days of spontaneous communication therapy... And other moments, a woman wants to hear that she's a dirty b!+¢h, so everything in moderation...

(A bit more unsolicited advice for you there, BK... Don't knock it, I had to suffer to get it... it seemed like unsolicited suffering to me at the time...)

PedroCarpintero · 2023-07-19T06:33:09Z

DeliciousTears Hi DT. It was an ulcer, which could have come about by a variety of options: syphilis, HIV, or just a plain chancroid ulcer. Every test that could have been tested came back as negative, and there is no direct testing for chancroid in itself, so I was officially diagnosed with chancroid, which I knew before even entering the clinic, and which (according to my experience) is a bacteria that can get transmitted non-sexually, for instance from a bar of soap that my brothel-visiting friend was in possession of. Since the ulcer was small, I decided to try natural remedies... I went to the countryside, to have time alone to heal (on various levels... an STD really leaves one physiologically depressed... as well as a sudden break-up of a lovely relationship on top of that)... by the time I got to my hillside camp-out, the sweating from the journey had propagated the bacteria, and having left in the morning with a little ulcer to cure, I arrived at night with huge multiple ulcers, and little natural medicine to heal them. In panic, and with much prayer, I got the intuition to use bee sting venon... which turned out to be the best cure (it might sound like a painful cure, but it is in fact a hell of a lot less painful than tea-tree oil, which the internet recommended.)

Leaving the horror story behind, I recommend that both partners have a wash before coming into loving contact with one another, it is a really great practice... not just to prevent foreign bacteria, energetically it is a better, cleaner and purer (but get your own soap).

I was raised in the AIDS fear-mongering era, so sex was immediately associated with disease and dirtiness, even before I was sexually active. It is a huge cultural wound that has to be healed, because such a silent social wound also leads to later life insecurities about sex. Incredible and tragic how something so beautiful and pure, has now been twisted to be associated with things so filthy and depraved.

PedroCarpintero · 2023-07-19T06:47:43Z

Right... Any more questions from complete online strangers about the most intimate and heart-breaking experiences of my life?

If one has to get crucified on the cross of one's life, why not make it a grand public event for everyone to learn something from!

Going back to the article... perhaps Houston will soon be hosting robot brothels in the near future.

Fool on the Hill · 2023-07-19T13:04:38Z

PedroCarpintero You could have contracted that STD a long time ago with various partners. Sometimes they don’t show up for years. Some people carry and transmit and never show signs of infection. The risks are taken with pre-marital sex. It’s just the way it is. No sex, no “threats”. It’s difficult but achievable.

DeliciousTears · 2023-07-19T14:43:47Z

PedroCarpintero Ouch! Looks painful. According to what I've read it's also super rare. Without some kind of swab/culture it'd also be impossible to diagnose as many bacteria cause ulcers, even good 'ol nasty strains of MRSA...

In short, you could have gotten it from anywhere..

Buffalo_Ken · 2023-07-19T16:38:04Z

PedroCarpintero - begins with:

Hi BK. Thanks for your perspective on things.

Likewise PedroC! (if I may refer to you as such). I can relate to much of what you expressed....in fact, I'll read it again. Thanks for sharing.

Ken

Buffalo_Ken · 2023-07-21T19:37:18Z

PedroCarpintero - hells-bells, I just read it again and Pedro - that is fine sharing in my book. Man - I hope things go well for you and I think this lady you speak of must be most special - I know I would like to meet her, and maybe one day - who knows....maybe me and my love of my life will come an visit you and yours - or vice-versa.

What matters is I think what you have shared is something most of us can relate to - I know I can.

Ken

steven23 · 2023-07-20T06:57:32Z

it doesnt surprise me with so much on line dating going on and anal sex..plus compromised immune systems because of the vax..what a cocktail of filth,body cant handle it

Dwoods44 · 2023-07-21T17:39:04Z

Here is a link to "brain bleed" which I have never heard of as a diagnosis of death. [Link] Until now.

Dwoods44 · 2023-07-21T17:50:34Z

Dwoods44 Another link from Dr. Makis of Canada regarding seizures. [Link]

Buffalo_Ken · 2023-07-21T17:50:55Z

Dwoods44 - it seems "blood ailments" are on the rise and statistically speaking there is only one explanation.

I sure hope some remedy for those took the jab is found soon and I think that is likely.

Meanwhile - justice must be served.

It will be.

Best to you Dwoods44 - be it a golden or a shepherd or artistry from a long time ago - however you present yourself - I appreciate your wisdom.

Ken

Buffalo_Ken · 2023-07-21T17:52:43Z

Dwoods44 - I'll double post being this is on topic:

Ed Dowd Drops Bombshell Data - LewRockwell - [Link]

Mcsnacks · 2023-07-21T19:22:21Z

Dwoods44 They are called brain aneurysms. My best friend from high school had one and died after we graduated from college in 2001.

Mcsnacks · 2023-07-21T19:28:16Z

Buffalo_Ken I don't think you understand what statistically means because you aren't using it right. There are no statistics that can prove what you believe because there are a 100 other factors that could be the cause. Blood ailments being on the rise could be because the average age of society has increased drastically. It could be because obesity has seen dramatic increases. Or that health has declined because the amount of exercise people get is decreasing and their diets are becoming worse.

Dwoods44 · 2023-07-22T01:43:01Z

Mcsnacks Thanks, yes I've heard of that.

Artex · 2023-07-21T19:25:40Z

Serial monogamists who get tested before/after every sexual relationship aren't at high risk. Of course that requires the self-control to keep it in your pants for a couple weeks after you meet someone.

parzival · 2023-07-23T07:11:19Z

How Do Vaccines Cause Autism? Past discoveries that can help us understand the current wave of neurological spike protein injuries. A MIDWESTERN DOCTORJUL 21, 2023 [Link]

Dwoods44 · 2023-07-23T11:41:30Z

parzival Thanks for the link. Andrew Wakefield presented a CDC whistleblower who stated that the CDC changed research inclusion criteria to avoid publishing statistical results that would indicate that the MMR vaccine caused autism is black people. The documentary is VAXXED, and if you do a search you will find plenty of articles vilifying Wakefield.

parzival · 2023-07-23T11:51:02Z

Dwoods44 Thanks! I saw Vaxxed. Would like to see the follow up. We have a DOD/Pharma Shill that is haunting these threads these days. I've had plenty to say:

How a highly effective vaccine turns into a mediocre vaccine - or worse

Detected fraudulence aside, there is no stronger criticism of a study than refuting the key result by using the study data. That opportunity does not arise often. I present a striking example,...

Mcsnacks · 2023-07-23T18:38:22Z

Dwoods44 STATEMENT OF WILLIAM W. THOMPSON, Ph.D., REGARDING THE 2004 ARTICLE EXAMINING THE POSSIBILITY OF A RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MMR VACCINE AND AUTISM," Thompson's statement began:

I regret that my coauthors and I omitted statistically significant information in our 2004 article published in the journal Pediatrics. The omitted data suggested that African American males who received the MMR vaccine before age 36 months were at increased risk for autism. Decisions were made regarding which findings to report after the data were collected, and I believe that the final study protocol was not followed.

Dwoods44 · 2023-07-24T00:01:10Z

Mcsnacks OK. The CDC changed the reporting standards so that autism for blacks caused by the MMR vaccine was not statistically significant. What does it mean?

parzival · 2023-07-23T11:59:56Z

The kill box: [Link]

ReRan ·

parzival Thanks!

· 2023-07-23T14:23:56Z