Ebola Virus

whodathunkit wrote:

Odysseus wrote:Who's "us"? Also, it's fairly obvious that not everyone here thinks like I think. But you'd be surprised. . .

US = Others like me who see a bit more passive-aggressive meanness in your posts than CS apparently does.  Trust me, they're out there.   People who constantly enact your kind of "comedy" are simply presumers upon the tolerance of others.

Since you won't stop pulling it, I won't stop saying it:  your "satire" schtick was cute the first couple hundred times you did it.  But every comedy routine gets old.   Yours already is.

Can you provide some evidence of these "others like me"? I think CS knows exactly what's going on. "Tolerance of others"? Fucking ban me, I wouldn't give a shit.

CS, I tend to agree. I think you provide some great examples of how we sabotage our own faculties for preventing infection.

The one thing I'd say though is that the human immune system isn't an impenetrable fortress. For the most part, it is extremely effective especially if its given the challenges to bolster itself over a lifetime. But again, its only as good as the threat its able to defend against. Its an evolutionary race and there is a huge amount of pressure for rapid adaptation at that level of organization, causing bacteria and viruses to evolve much faster than we do. Our immune system is a reactive response.

There will always be something that comes down the pipe that is highly adapted to infecting the human organism. The fact that our immune system destroys the rest is actually acting to select for these more virulent types.

The difference is: you get your typical flu virus, its just not virulent enough to kill you before the immune system is able to mount the defense (although examples have occurred in the past, like the 1918 flu); you get the infection and then you get sick until the proper antibodies are formed and the immune system can do its job. Then you develop immunological memory for the next time you encounter that bug. But with something like Ebola, it kills you faster than you are able to do this.

I don't care how strong your immune system is. This bug is literally just so virulent that even the most mineral-sufficient, healthy individual is susceptible. Its dangerous for everyone. Its got a case fatality rate of 90%. I mean, thats ridiculous. And without treatment, you're pretty likely to die. So could you go and roll around in some infected blood and survive? Its possible. But I'm not taking the chance. Not even if I'd never been sick in my life.

Odysseus wrote:Can you provide some evidence of these "others like me"? I think CS knows exactly what's going on. "Tolerance of others"? Fucking ban me, I wouldn't give a shit.

None that I'm at liberty to share.  You can take it or leave it.  Does it really matter?  Would you quit doing it if I could prove 15 members think like I do?   Why does a number make a difference?  Being a jerk is being a jerk. Sometimes no one speaks up about it.   That's just a fact of life.   Hitler was a jerk at Munich. The whole world gave him a pass. Look what the hell happened then.   

At any rate, it's CS's board.  He doesn't want you gone, you don't get banned.  That's fine with me.  He's a tolerant soul and I admire that.  

FWIW, I don't mind what you say, just the way you say it.   And sometimes I even like what you post.  Sometimes I agree with you.  But that doesn't mean I can't or won't call you on your passive-aggressive pseudo-humor.  Especially when it's the same old thing time after time.

Again, repetition is everything.   The first 100 times, it's funny.   The second 100 times, no so much.   Find a new dead horse to flog for a while, or even try making fun of some dumb mainstream health dogma.  Lord knows there's at least enough of that out there that's at least as satire-worthy as there is in alternative health.  Then maybe you can circle back around to violet ray guns and selenium after a long while, and it will be entertaining for another 100 tries.  

Too many funny guys become unfunny due to lack of understanding when to stop beating the horse.  I hope some day you can internalize that.  But of course, if you really *are* being passive-aggressive, snarky and mean in the guise of being funny, you never will.  Will you?

Nay, we need some yin and yang on these forums. Otherwise we just get used hearing ourselves talk about the same things ad infinitum. I can sorta see CS's thought that if we fortify our bodies properly it would be a good enuff defense against a foreign invader. I've been taking ginseng for the last 3 or 4 winters and I haven't caught a cold yet, even though I come in contact with a lot of people. I used to catch colds all the time before that.

But that doesn't mean that we are impervious to germs period. What if an exterrestial germ that came to earth on a meteorite was able to overcome our defenses? Something that selenium and all the vitamins and minerals on this earth can't interact with? An unholy chemistry that we have no preparedness for. We would be doomed.

Let's talk about the 1918 flu "pandemic" or whatever other *re-written* history (propaganda) that has successfully conditioned fear of a germ threat.

When the "wonder drug" aspirin was introduced into the population, it was deemed to be a miracle substance.

The problem was...no one knew what the *effective* dose was. Believe me...people took way too much.

Take a look at this, a quote from Oxford Journals Medicine & Health Clinical Infectious Diseases: Salicylates and Pandemic Influenza Mortality, 1918–1919 Pharmacology, Pathology, and Historic Evidence

"In summary, just before the 1918 death spike, aspirin was recommended in regimens now known to be potentially toxic and to cause pulmonary edema and may therefore have contributed to overall pandemic mortality and several of its mysteries. Young adult mortality may be explained by willingness to use the new, recommended therapy and the presence of youth in regimented treatment settings (military). The lower mortality of children may be a result of less aspirin use"

http://cid.oxfordjournals.org/content/49/9/1405.full

The bottom line or my point is: Virtually all episodes of so-called germ induced/pandemics is not an accurate account of the truth. Polio is the same thing. A different toxin causing an epidemic, then the problem blamed on something else.
This is politics as usual. This pattern will continue indefinitely.

Load up on vitamin C not toxins, insure there is plenty of vitamin D, insure there is some vitamin A (to maintain the gut lining), insure there is selenium, iodine, sulfur....

"Polio is the same thing. A different toxin causing an epidemic, then the problem blamed on something else. "

That's strange. I've never heard of polio being blamed on something else. In fact it is still happening in africa and pakistan. What do you think is an additional culprit that can be backed up by health studies like that aspirin one?

shaftless wrote:"Polio is the same thing. A different toxin causing an epidemic, then the problem blamed on something else. "

That's strange. I've never heard of polio being blamed on something else. In fact it is still happening in africa and pakistan. What do you think is an additional culprit that can be backed up by health studies like that aspirin one?

Polio still occurs in the USA also, they just call it a handful of other names now, such as Guillain Barre Syndrome, Acute Flaccid Paralysis, and dozens of others.

What causes this? lead, mercury, cyanide, arsenic, pesticides, etc. (vaccines)

More info here:

http://vactruth.com/2012/04/25/change-names-of-diseases/

CS, do you think 2000mg/day liposomal C is enough? Also, do you need to split your dose up like with water soluble, or does liposomal have a longer half-life?

whodathunkit wrote:CS, do you think 2000mg/day liposomal C is enough?  Also, do you need to split your dose up like with water soluble, or does liposomal have a longer half-life?

Many of the liposomals last about 6-hours. If you were to get sick, that would be when you would amp up the dose.

http://www.naturalnews.com/046347_Ebola_vaccine_genetically_engineered_virus_depopulation.html

hiilikeyourbeard wrote:http://www.naturalnews.com/046347_Ebola_vaccine_genetically_engineered_virus_depopulation.html

Haha I just posted this in the infant vaccination thread. Didnt realize you posted it too

angstman wrote:

hiilikeyourbeard wrote:http://www.naturalnews.com/046347_Ebola_vaccine_genetically_engineered_virus_depopulation.html

Haha I just posted this in the infant vaccination thread.  Didnt realize you posted it too

Lol no worries man. I need to get myself a gun soon. Christ.

Interesting points, CS. I wasn't aware of that connection, however, I still don't believe it changes the fact that the flu virus was the killer. We can't rule out the germ theory altogether because at day's end the death still resulted from infection by the "bug". But the terrain theory allows us to understand that virulence in a specific context, one in which we are hampering our own defenses, essentially giving the bug the opportunity to prosper inside of us.

But perhaps I shouldn't have used the flu virus as the example. The ebola group is more deadly. I don't care how shatter-proof your immunity is, this is just one bug that's come along which the human body isn't as adapted to handle quickly enough. Take the NE caused by the Puumala virus, which is also a type of hemorrhagic fever. Its fairly mild. Different virus. Then we get to ebola. This thing just kills your liver and bone marrow, causes you to swell and bleed, and go into shock and die before the immune system can kill it. Its a scary organism. I don't think its trivial enough to say that this thing isn't dangerous if we are mineral sufficient and our barriers are intact. This thing just kills.

Now, whether this thing sprang up by natural means or whether it was weaponized, that's a different talk.

AS54 wrote:Interesting points, CS. I wasn't aware of that connection, however, I still don't believe it changes the fact that the flu virus was the killer. We can't rule out the germ theory altogether because at day's end the death still resulted from infection by the "bug". But the terrain theory allows us to understand that virulence in a specific context, one in which we are hampering our own defenses, essentially giving the bug the opportunity to prosper inside of us.

But perhaps I shouldn't have used the flu virus as the example. The ebola group is more deadly. I don't care how shatter-proof your immunity is, this is just one bug that's come along which the human body isn't as adapted to handle quickly enough. Take the NE caused by the Puumala virus, which is also a type of hemorrhagic fever. Its fairly mild. Different virus. Then we get to ebola. This thing just kills your liver and bone marrow, causes you to swell and bleed, and go into shock and die before the immune system can kill it. Its a scary organism. I don't think its trivial enough to say that this thing isn't dangerous if we are mineral sufficient and our barriers are intact. This thing just kills.

Now, whether this thing sprang up by natural means or whether it was weaponized, that's a different talk.

Places such as Liberia have depleted levels of selenium in the soil. This is well documented.

However, most people are generally deficient in selenium.

There's a reason why I never get the flu. The secret? Vitamin D, selenium and zinc...however as a general preventative...and especially in acute situations, there's high-dose vitamin C.

Either we buy the phony nonsense from lame stream media or you experiment for yourself.

Now, since I've worked in the capacity of treating infection diseases, and autoimmune...I can say with experience that what we are told about this stuff from lame stream media is a bunch of _____ crap.

The problem also is that anyone is who interested in their health who also undergoes academic study also has to unlearn some of the fiction.

I would call the germ theory a hypothesis at best.

Could an Ebola induced hemorrhagic fever be caused by a type of scurvy (vitamin C deficiency)?  

Here's an interesting page on that topic:

http://vitamincfoundation.org/www.orthomed.com/ebola.htm

Are these man made?  

Here's a link that speaks to that. The make mention of selenium and vitamin C.

http://the-tap.blogspot.com/2014/08/survive-ebola-with-vitamin-c-and.html

Regardless of it is a real threat or not...very few people are at risk. Think of all the people who die in car accidents each year, or worse, think of everyone who dies each year from taking prescription drugs as directed by the doctor. That action right there is the leading cause of death by far.

CS, do you think we are in danger of mandatory vaccination for Ebola?   

Delphine wrote:
CS, do you think we are in danger of mandatory vaccination for Ebola?    

I really can't say.

All I do know is that the test they use to "check" for Ebola relies on PCR to find non-standardized particles, which could
be anything--translation, Ebola virus is not real and does not differ from any other fever like challenge.

Unless they can actually identify which so far is non-standardized, similar to the fraud of HIV, it is not possible to develop a vaccine for it.

CausticSymmetry wrote:

Delphine wrote:
CS, do you think we are in danger of mandatory vaccination for Ebola?    

I really can't say.

All I do know is that the test they use to "check" for Ebola relies on PCR to find non-standardized particles, which could
be anything--translation, Ebola virus is not real and does not differ from any other fever like challenge.

Unless they can actually identify which so far is non-standardized, similar to the fraud of HIV, it is not possible to develop a vaccine for it.

OK, thanks. Let's keep spreading the truth on this. Better to light a single candle etc.

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2006-10/cums-rdk101606.php

^ Embedded in the link you posted, CS.

Trust me. You know I'm far from trying to be a prick here. I think the vitamin C information you posted was really interesting, and hadn't understood the relationship to scurvy.

But if we have evidence that both HIV and Ebola are producing a characteristic protein that disarms the immune system, then aren't we confirming both the germ and terrain theory all at once?

The terrain theory, insofar as the immune system has to be compromised for the infection to remain viable. And the germ theory, in that a secreted enzyme from the virus itself is the antagonist. This at least suggests to me that the insult - or part o it - is coming from the virus itself, although we could probably be sure that any other deficiency of minerals could be compounding or synergizing with the viral proteins.

I just think the idea of the germ theory becomes self-evident when we consider the alternative, which would be that the human immune system is perfect. That if it is supplied with all of the necessary materials, there isn't an infectious agent out there that could - of its own capacity - get around it and cause infection. I think the principles of evolution are sufficient to do away with that idea, because that would suggest, in my opinion, some kind of pre-determination of design, when we know that the immune system has gotten to its current state (at large) through millennia of adaptation to the infectious threats it encountered. By definition then, there are and always will be microorganisms whose own adaptations outpace our immunity. Its a game of capture the flag. Something like Ebola (kill rate of 90%) occurs to me as one good example of that bad mother fucker that our innate immunity just hasn't caught up with, pretty much because when you start hemorrhaging and losing bone marrow, its hard to mount much of an immune response.

But what complicates it is that not much of the world population has ever been exposed. But no doubt there would be a select few present, or who would arise, that could. With a 10% survival rate, and ignoring the role treatment had in that probability, we could assume there are already examples of those who can fight the infection. And the effects we're seeing on the ape population. Large numbers of apes in Africa are dying from Ebola. Would we expect a dietary deficiency of vitamin C or selenium to play a role in what's happening with them?

On the subject of it being man made or arising naturally, I think both are possible and neither would negate what I've said above. But I do think its much more possible that human beings could produce the super-virulent strains I mentioned above. Evolution is slow and undirected. It requires randomness. Human beings can alter genes with intent. If they had the intention of depopulating, there is no doubt they could do faster work in creating a super bug than evolution could.

AS54 wrote:http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2006-10/cums-rdk101606.php

^ Embedded in the link you posted, CS.

Trust me. You know I'm far from trying to be a prick here. I think the vitamin C information you posted was really interesting, and hadn't understood the relationship to scurvy.

But if we have evidence that both HIV and Ebola are producing a characteristic protein that disarms the immune system, then aren't we confirming both the germ and terrain theory all at once?

The terrain theory, insofar as the immune system has to be compromised for the infection to remain viable. And the germ theory, in that a secreted enzyme from the virus itself is the antagonist. This at least suggests to me that the insult - or part o it - is coming from the virus itself, although we could probably be sure that any other deficiency of minerals could be compounding or synergizing with the viral proteins.

I just think the idea of the germ theory becomes self-evident when we consider the alternative, which would be that the human immune system is perfect. That if it is supplied with all of the necessary materials, there isn't an infectious agent out there that could - of its own capacity - get around it and cause infection. I think the principles of evolution are sufficient to do away with that idea, because that would suggest, in my opinion, some kind of pre-determination of design, when we know that the immune system has gotten to its current state (at large) through millennia of adaptation to the infectious threats it encountered. By definition then, there are and always will be microorganisms whose own adaptations outpace our immunity. Its a game of capture the flag. Something like Ebola (kill rate of 90%) occurs to me as one good example of that bad mother fucker that our innate immunity just hasn't caught up with, pretty much because when you start hemorrhaging and losing bone marrow, its hard to mount much of an immune response.

But what complicates it is that not much of the world population has ever been exposed. But no doubt there would be a select few present, or who would arise, that could. With a 10% survival rate, and ignoring the role treatment had in that probability, we could assume there are already examples of those who can fight the infection. And the effects we're seeing on the ape population. Large numbers of apes in Africa are dying from Ebola. Would we expect a dietary deficiency of vitamin C or selenium to play a role in what's happening with them?

On the subject of it being man made or arising naturally, I think both are possible and neither would negate what I've said above. But I do think its much more possible that human beings could produce the super-virulent strains I mentioned above. Evolution is slow and undirected. It requires randomness. Human beings can alter genes with intent. If they had the intention of depopulating, there is no doubt they could do faster work in creating a super bug than evolution could.

Hi AS54 - I thought the same thing when I read that link (meaning, it was written from a perspective of a germ theory). However, here's a few quick points on that.

(1) So far no one can identify or standard a test to prove the existence of an Ebola virus. For now, we can assume it's some sort of toxin. If Ebola were to be found to be a virus (still not proven), it would have to come from our own cells.

(2) When specific cells reach a toxic threshold, they produce viruses in those cells--intentionally to release those toxins, and often at a price....fever, and other side-effects. Vasodilation, to increase permeability for transport of substances. A fever response is a sign the immune system is at work, however it does not a virus actually caused it.

(3) When viruses do harm the body, they are injected into the blood stream by way of vaccine...Check out any Dr. Tent video on youtube for a good example.

(4) Most diseases are iatrogenic (caused by a medical person unintentionally)

(5) Selenium is an essential trace element, and without it we cannot produce glutathione even with other precursors (sulfur based amino acids). Without glutathione, it is not possible to purge the toxins very effectively.
If low on glutathione, viruses tend to escalate by our own cells and cause various symptoms.

(6) Before the advent of antibiotics, people died if their thyroids were under performing, because it is the thyroid which cleans the blood. Modern medicine continues to ignore the real function of the human body in favor of fairy tail logic. Plus all those movies about "outbreaks" makes the public consciousness hard to shake.

(7) Selenoproteins, glutathione peroxidase and thioredoxin family reductase family, free radical scavenging, blocking lipid peroxidation, is crucial to the regulation of thyroid hormones. Conversion of T4 to T3 thyroid dependent deiodinase is related to selenoenzymes. I've seen some ridiculously sick people feel great in as little as 15 to 30 minutes on an IV of vitamin C. All with the symptoms presented on ebola scares.

CS, really enjoyed point (2). If you have any more information on that, please send it my way. Very interesting hypothesis. If it is your own hypothesis, that would be something worth exploring. To my knowledge, and emphasized by some of your points, scientists don't really have an understanding of where viruses exist in nature. Ebola is a good example. Once it has infected an organism it can be located in the host, and its transmission can be deduced, but scientists are pretty puzzled by where it starts to begin with. Where did the first one encounter the virus? What does the virus inhabit before entering a host, ignoring its time outside of a host during transmission. This is really, really interesting. If I were you, and I had any connections in the field at all, that's an idea I'd probably be pursuing if it was my own haha. Like I said though, I'm not sure if that idea has been stated before. I've never heard it anyway.

AS54 - This theory is not my own. However, if there's anything that I've gleaned from working in the medical profession on the *why* some theories never gain any deserved traction, it is purely political.

I used to beat my head against the wall wondering why until I started noticing the same familiar theme over and over again. Usually a hidden motivation retracted or obscured from the public.

I realize this language seems awful conspiratorial doesn't it?

Sometimes it's not necessarily a money motivated plot....it can be a law suit or blame (we made a mistake we don't want to admit to reason) or oops, we just killed a whole bunch of people...it's a little embarrassing.

So whats the real probable reason why Louise Pasteur's germ theory caught on and Anton Beauchamp's did not?
Louise Pasteur worked for the government. That says it right there. Next, pharmaceutical industrial complex makes billions from this theory. The truth is more complex and makes no money.

I remember a prison study that involved vitamin D. If you ask any run of the mill MD about influenza, they'll tell you that people "catch" the flu. Nonsense. Why? When prisoners will given sufficient vitamin D they did not get the flu during the "flu season," which happens to be during a low UV-B radiation period.

Vitamin D is instrumental in producing glutathione.

Let's get back to Ebola for a moment:

Lack of sanitation, unknown toxin usually causes some type of disease. Is it really a germ or virus? I say no. However, a toxin can induce a deficiency of a nutrient, vitamin or mineral.

No doubt you've heard of the infamous "Black Death" or the "Black Plague" that described symptoms such as multiple hemorrhages, originating from mucous membranes (gastrointestinal, pulmonary and genitourinary). Is there any real difference between this and scurvy (a severe vitamin C deficiency?)

https://www.seleneriverpress.com/historical-archives/all-archive-articles/199-have-we-forgotten-the-lesson-of-scurvy

Even if the best scientists were to tell the CDC they are full of s**t, they wouldn't change their mantra...they are invested too deep and they are 100% bed with the medical industrial complex.

So, their job is to spread fear and propaganda over a germ that doesn't exist.

One irony about fevers is, medically trained people are taught to believe that a fever is dangerous and must be suppressed with something like Tylenol or aspirin. This practice makes vaccines far more dangerous than they already are. The fever is performed by the body as a measure to transport substances during an emergency.

Anyway back to the original question. Yes, specific cells of a known virus make those viruses with intention. Viruses themselves have no organisms within themselves (no digestive system, respiratory system), all they do is help release toxins from cells. Anything that helps produce glutathione will help bind to these toxins and excrete them, hence viral replication is no longer needed.

Oh, Monsanto is involved. Makes sense now.

I have plenty of colloidal silver, liposomal vitamin C, liposomal colostrum, selenium, iodine etc. on hand and am not worried.

I'm not worried about the illusory Ebola. I am concerned about such things as mandatory vaccines, and scenarios such as
detailed here. Quarantine etc.

http://www.naturalnews.com/046378_CDC_Ebola_pandemic_survival_tips.html

Yeah, the only thing I get sick from these days is when I have a healing crisis from all the supplements I take.