It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Silver Bullet Cures and the drug companys

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 24 2005 @ 03:09 PM
link   
Mattison...why don't we put everyone with HIV in a bubble?? Then they won't catch anything, isn't that right? Is there a shortage of bubbles?? Maybe we should get the drug companies and big businesses to take some of their MASSIVE profits and buy some bubbles for all the people with immunity dosorders. Maybe we could have bubble communities??

[edit on 24-2-2005 by Zabilgy]




posted on Feb, 24 2005 @ 03:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zabilgy
Mattison...why don't we put everyone with HIV in a bubble?? Then they won't catch anything, isn't that right? Is there a shortage of bubbles?? Maybe we should get the drug companies and big businesses to take some of their MASSIVE profits and buy some bubbles for all the people with immunity dosorders. Maybe we could have bubble communities??

[edit on 24-2-2005 by Zabilgy]

Are you serious? I am not even sure how to respond to such a post. Is this sarcastic? Why? I guess I'll have to take it face value.

1. Why don't we put everyone with HIV in a bubble??

I would imagine not everyone with HIV wants or even needs to be in a bubble. Though, if someone wanted this, I suppose it could be a viable option. I suppose they wouldn't catch anything, provided the bubble wasn't breached.

2. Is there a shortage of bubbles??
Not to my knowledge... I think bubble is a misnomer anyway. Not a Seinfeld fan, I take it? The bubble is really just a plastic sheet. I would imagine there is more of a shortage of people who want to live in bubbles.

I don't see why it's so difficult to keep this particular thread on track. This thread has digressed from discussing an alleged medical/scientific conspiracy to making sarcastic comments that seem to serve no constructive purpose. Perhaps we can get the thread back on track.



posted on Feb, 24 2005 @ 04:14 PM
link   


I suppose they wouldn't catch anything, provided the bubble wasn't breached.


What could cause a bubble to breach? I am familiar with the Seinfeld "bubble boy" episode, but I'm not sure what this has to do with anything discussed here. I do remember the movie though, "The Boy in The Plastic Bubble" with John Travolta. That was excellent and I don't think his bubble ever got breached.

But I was serious. I thought of this when HIV first came out. Didn't "bubble" come about years ago for children with immune difficiencies? So why not use them for those with HIV?? And again, there could be whole communities created. Maybe this should be a topic for a whole new thread!!



posted on Feb, 24 2005 @ 04:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zabilgy
I am familiar with the Seinfeld "bubble boy" episode, but I'm not sure what this has to do with anything discussed here.

Sorry, didn't think your post was serious.


I thought of this when HIV first came out. Didn't "bubble" come about years ago for children with immune difficiencies? So why not use them for those with HIV?? And again, there could be whole communities created. Maybe this should be a topic for a whole new thread!!

I think the difference is that HIV people are merely immune compromised, and don't lack an immune system entirely. The SCIDS people, at least as I understand it, for the most part have NO immune system. The slightest infection can kill them. I don't believe HIV leads to absolute suppression of all immunity, I could be wrong about this though. Could be a quality of life issue to though... personally, if I had HIV, I'd probably rather take my chances at living as normal a life as possible as opposed to living in a bubble for the rest of my days.

Though, perhaps your post isn't completely far fetched... instead of bubbles though... maybe entirely HEPA filtered sterile communities could be devised, although it seems like it could be highly impractical... at least right now.



posted on Feb, 25 2005 @ 03:11 AM
link   
Mattison
In response to your earlier post on page 1, that replied to mine: No I don't have any proof that scientists who wouldn't play ball were murdered. I imagine trails are covered rather well. Have you ever know scientists to disappear? I do know cures are covered up and even criminalized. Take for example the conspiracy surrounding potassium. It's quite obvious that potassium is necessary for life, yet you CANNOT buy it in sufficient quantities to keep your body from pissing it all away. I would wager that 90% of Americans suffer from a severe, and crippling potassium deficiency that manifests itself in angina, hypertension, stroke, and diabetes, plus others.

Food that comes from 'weak' soil that is battered by NPK fertilizer (coming from the same companies that own labs producing synthetic pharmaceuticals) is not nutritous enough to sustain life. The chemical companies, oil concerns, and pharmaceutical companies have formed a sort of triad. They monopolize their markets at the expense of their customers. They cause pain and suffering in such great measure, it puts the current war and all before it to shame.

Cancer is another example, there are a number of holistic cures that appear to be very effective, but the doctors peddling them are harrassed, assaulted, and cast out of the medical fraternity. I can't remembe the doctors name, but an Australian(?) was just arrested for prescribing apricot kernels to his patients who were suffering from cancer. Apparently the apricot kernels contain a vitamin, B17, which delivers a dose of cyanide to the cancer cluster and effectively nukes it. The treatment has proven results, I'm sure you can find some info about it on the web, but there is nothing in the medical journals.

People who have cancer are well advised to seek an herbal remedy, a vitamin cure, a mineral supplement, natural cures of all kinds, before they go to a 'reputable' doctor to be injected with poison and irradiated to varying degrees.

The elders of the medical profession, and the publishers of medical journals, must have conspired to keep various cancer treatments and other mundane cures quiet. I think anything that cures disease, and cannot be patented, has not only been ignored, but criminalized in many cases. Marijuana is a perfect example of this. I'm sure you are well intentioned, as are the vast majority of scientists, but there is a larger machine at work, and I believe in order for that machine to survive it must perpetuate disinformation.

I hope you are a force working in opposition to the powers that be. If you are a scientist, you must be reasonably inteligent. I surmise you are just from the conversations you engage in here on ATS. If you truly see no conspiracy, ask youself; could it be because you do not want to see? (You're welcome to ask the same of me.)

The case of fluoride being added to water and included in drinks designed for regular consumption also worries me. If scientists were truly concerned about the population, wouldn't more be speaking out against this sort of thing? Dentists use it, it must be okay...

I can't accept that so many doctors are idiots, therefore the only remaining answer is that they're greedy and crooked. I just don't know. I really, really hope I'm wrong. Sometimes though, I just know things, and all the hope in the world won't change that. Of course this isn't an issue that one fact, or one case can resolve. It's an impossible conspiracy to unravel because of the fact that it isn't so much organized as an inevitable evolution of the organism. I do believe though, that if the pharmaceutical and chemical companies were neutered, the world would be a better place. Do you disagree?

How do you explain the fact that 80% of patent requests are for new versions of old drugs? Why is so little money spent on researching new drugs, instead of repackaging old ones? Why is R&D so obsessively focused on big money, small impact things like allergies, headaches, pain relief, and decongestants?

Also, I know there are a number of federal grants, and I know that most research labs accept some money from the government, but the big money, the buy out, stock option, yacht, house in maui, mistress in new york, these things come from liscensing deals and the transfer of information from the public domain into the private copyrighted zone, and the attendant gag orders, non disclosure contracts, and non competition clauses. I imagine if a scientist won't sell something they want, they'll increase pressure and eventually kill the upstart. They're nothing if not predictably efficient.

I think we have much in common in the fact that we both perceive many of the problems that come with a capitalist society and the pressure that puts on scientists who are supposed to be helping people. Where we differ is you don't seem to be able to allow for the sort of human cruelty and greed that I've seen and can testify to. I think many people have a hard time accepting the changes occuring in America because of their sheer magnitude. "A lie told often enough achieves the status of truth", that sort of attitude.

What's your opinion on cigarettes? Are they the scapegoat for forest fires and nuclear tests? I think so...



posted on Feb, 25 2005 @ 08:45 AM
link   
WyredOne...excellent post. A good portion of it is over my head. But I am in full agreement with you that there's something going on that stinks quite bad. Read the quote on my signature line about democracy. Most of the money in this country is in the hands of too few and those that have it are looking out for their best interests, not the interests of the general public. Hospitals (which are mostly owned by big corporations) and pharmaceutical companies make huge money on sick people. And they certainly wouldn't stay in business healing and medicating only accident victims and the elderly.

I read recently that most medications cost pennies to make. Let's take Wellbutrin as an example. Years ago I was prescribed it for depression (and it actually helped me quit smoking)...when I was first prescribed it, I did not have insurance, so my monthly prescription cost me over $200. If I needed it today, it would cost me $10 because I have insurance (of course the insurance company pays a portion of the difference).....this medication costs less than a dollar to make a months supply. When I was paying over $200/month for it, no one even gave me a kiss after they were done with me, if you know what I mean.

Just an example of why the pharmaceutical companies like sick people or like to make people think they are sick. I'm disgusted by the amount of ads on TV for drugs. The drug companies have become drug pushers. They don't want disease cured and to have fewer diseases. They want more diseases!!....and so do the people that own hospitals!!



posted on Feb, 25 2005 @ 12:04 PM
link   
WyrdeOne

Thanks for a lucid, well written, thoughtful post!



No I don't have any proof that scientists who wouldn't play ball were murdered. I imagine trails are covered rather well. Have you ever know scientists to disappear?

Other than the 40 Microbiologists thing, and other anecdotal things that I have heard over the years, I don’t personally know of any scientists that have outright disappeared.


I do know cures are covered up and even criminalized. Take for example the conspiracy surrounding potassium. It's quite obvious that potassium is necessary for life, yet you CANNOT buy it in sufficient quantities to keep your body from pissing it all away.

I am unaware of the conspiracy surrounding potassium. Got any links? I was under the impression that there was no USRDA (not saying the USRDA is necessarily sufficient in it’s recommendations) but something like 2g was suggested. Why do you need to buy potassium? It’s in all kinds of fresh foods.



I would wager that 90% of Americans suffer from a severe, and crippling potassium deficiency that manifests itself in angina, hypertension, stroke, and diabetes, plus others.

Well this wouldn’t surprise me either, but I would wager it’s because most Americans eat total S&%T 98% of the time.


Food that comes from 'weak' soil that is battered by NPK fertilizer (coming from the same companies that own labs producing synthetic pharmaceuticals) is not nutritous enough to sustain life.

Well… I certainly can’t say that I disagree with you here either. I try to eat organic. I would have to disagree with the not nutritious enough to sustain life statement. Certainly there exist studies suggesting that food is in fact less nutritious today than it was in the past, but lots of people live to be older than they have in the past, with an acceptable quality of life. Doesn’t this alone suggest that one can in fact sustain themselves on the food that exists today? I am very particular about what I eat… not suggesting that most other Americans are but I am personally.


The chemical companies, oil concerns, and pharmaceutical companies have formed a sort of triad. They monopolize their markets at the expense of their customers. They cause pain and suffering in such great measure, it puts the current war and all before it to shame.

Acknowledged and agreed.


Cancer is another example, there are a number of holistic cures that appear to be very effective, but the doctors peddling them are harrassed, assaulted, and cast out of the medical fraternity.

Okay… I can certainly acknowledge the western medicine is completely incorrect in it’s approach to battling many, or even most disorders. I personally believe that focusing on symptom relief and isolated organs and systems, and calling that curing diseases is wrong. I am further willing to acknowledge that there are holistic cures appear to be effective in certain instances. Hell, I even thought about going into Chinese medicine before doing grad. School… but I enjoyed the actual science, which somewhat lacking in Chinese med (not slamming Chinese med). I don’t personally know of any Doctor’s who’ve been cast out of the medical community for promoting holistic cures. I know that one’s peers can cast one out intellectually, and within their own community, but that’s something completely different. Here in the Phx, area there is the Southwest College of Naturopathic Medicine, which was recently accredited to certify Naturopathic Doctors. There are a few other such schools scattered throughout the United States. While I understand they are insignificant when compared to the number of ‘traditional’ Medical schools, they do exist, and they are not suppressed. They might be suppressed within a particular community, they are not completely unavailable… for the most part that is.

I can't remembe the doctors name, but an Australian(?) was just arrested for prescribing apricot kernels to his patients who were suffering from cancer. Apparently the apricot kernels contain a vitamin, B17, which delivers a dose of cyanide to the cancer cluster and effectively nukes it. The treatment has proven results, I'm sure you can find some info about it on the web, but there is nothing in the medical journals.

Well, I can’t really comment on this specific case, as I don’t know the details. I won’t address whether or not apricot kernels are an effective cancer cure here, as I don’t think it’s relevant. Apricot kernels are readily available if one wishes to consume them.


People who have cancer are well advised to seek an herbal remedy, a vitamin cure, a mineral supplement, natural cures of all kinds, before they go to a 'reputable' doctor to be injected with poison and irradiated to varying degrees.

Well, I don’t necessarily disagree with this either.


The elders of the medical profession, and the publishers of medical journals, must have conspired to keep various cancer treatments and other mundane cures quiet.

Certainly journals have content that they consider unacceptable, and the medical community does dismiss some ideas, concepts, and techniques that most likely have some value as quackery. But this is distinctly different from a community wide conspiracy to suppress these things. And many MD’s, PhD’s and other ‘doctors’ often simply accept what their establishment feeds them… and don’t think and research for themselves (sadly), they are not out to suppress cures. I think it could be in some instances lack of critical thinking and personal evaluation of evidence, not necessarily a conspiracy.


I think anything that cures disease, and cannot be patented, has not only been ignored

Certainly by mainstream medicine and drug companies.


but criminalized in many cases.

Okay… so far many cases has amounted to a single case in Austrailia, about which I am unable to comment, because you don’t know the source. Do you have any other examples?


Marijuana is a perfect example of this.

While I certainly believe that current Federal policies with respect to marijuana are a joke and are completely hypocritical, I am unaware of marijuana being known for curing any diseases, though I am aware of the benefits of using marijuana in certain instances to alleviate disease symptoms and other difficulties. Furthermore, I can’t say that I am not known to indulge on occasion.


I'm sure you are well intentioned, as are the vast majority of scientists, but there is a larger machine at work, and I believe in order for that machine to survive it must perpetuate disinformation.

Certainly, I have to acknowledge the existence of the larger machine at work… I certainly believe that large pharma corporations act in their own best interest generally at the expense of the consumer, I would tend to believe this about other large corporations, including the government. However I tend to believe that pharmas are more likely to disregard human safety than anything else, releasing unproven compounds, or drugs that haven’t been adequately tested for safety. There certainly exist numerous recent examples of this. But I still contend that if the drug companies did have an actual cancer cure, they’d be fools to sit on it. It’s a total cash cow. The problem is that there will likely never be a cure-all drug for cancer. Cancer is a disease that is defined by multiple genetic factors. There can be considerable variation in cancer cells within a single patient, there can be striking variation between the ‘same’ cancers in different individuals. This is what makes the disease so difficult to combat. It’s not like a bacterial infection where antibiotics kill off a single variety of attacker. In cancer there are multiple different varieties of attackers…even within the same disease. It seems like there will never be a compound that can select and kill such a wide variety of unhealthy cells, without damaging healthy cells. However, I fully believe that individuals are capable of healing themselves, provided diseases aren’t too advanced. That’s what immune systems are for. IMO, it’s more a matter of removing the immunosuppressive or mutagenic compounds that created and/or allowed the disease to proliferate in the first place.


I hope you are a force working in opposition to the powers that be. If you are a scientist, you must be reasonably inteligent. I surmise you are just from the conversations you engage in here on ATS. If you truly see no conspiracy, ask youself; could it be because you do not want to see? (You're welcome to ask the same of me.)

Mostly… I consider myself separate from all this… I publish my stuff, which is not earth shattering or super significant on the science end… Hell, I always say that probably less than 1000 people in the world are actually interested in the research I do. On the other hand, I do work with a company that is developing handheld bioterrorist agent sensors. Generally these devices are going to be distributed to soldiers in the field, and air sampling versions will eventually be mounted in cities and airports across the US. And I guess on a third hand, I do write a decent amount of bioethics stuff. I am particularly concerned about GMO’s, and the ever so subtle ‘backdooring’ of eugenics into an acceptable place in mainstream society. The eugenics thing in particular bugs me… I lose sleep over it. I am interested to hear your reaction to these things.


The case of fluoride being added to water and included in drinks designed for regular consumption also worries me. If scientists were truly concerned about the population, wouldn't more be speaking out against this sort of thing? Dentists use it, it must be okay...

The fluoride thing is an entirely different issue – and I agree with you. Flouridation of water is not only completely unnecessary, but is most likely in fact, extremely harmful. Do you happen to know the source of these flourides? It’s NOT the NaF that is contained in your toothpaste (BTW, I DO use fluoridated toothpaste), it’s actually flourohydrasilicates. From what I understand the best source of this the ‘scrubbers’ that are contained within industrial smoke stacks. Some scientists are speaking about this. Most others I would imagine are unaware. You should see the looks I get from my colleagues at the suggestion that Aspartame might not be such a great thing to consume. I can piss an entire room full of my colleagues off by merely suggesting that genetic engineering could have harmful consequences, but I don’t think these things are conspiracy as much as they are ignorance. Even scientists, or maybe especially scientists often just accept what other scientists tell them at face value. I’ve always been particularly astonished by this. I got into science because I ENJOY finding things out for myself.


I can't accept that so many doctors are idiots, therefore the only remaining answer is that they're greedy and crooked. hrug>

They’re not necessarily idiots. But often times they are subject to the same ‘forces’ I described above… mainly that it’s easier to just accept what others tell you than to make a concerted effort to figure things out on your own. I and I agree it’s horrible that people with so much responsibility just want to take the easy way out. I do have to say this…I’ve taught and interacted with lots… hundreds of medical students, pre-med and med school. They are often cut from the same cloth. As students their attitude is often something like: Okay… I don’t really care about any of this background info… just tell me a method where I can get the right answer to this type of problem everytime. I am generalizing, but it’s based on a lot of anecdotal experience. And in the interest of quenching flames prior to them starting: I am aware that not ALL medical students are ‘cut from this cloth.’


It's an impossible conspiracy to unravel because of the fact that it isn't so much organized as an inevitable evolution of the organism. I do believe though, that if the pharmaceutical and chemical companies were neutered, the world would be a better place. Do you disagree?

I think it’s an inevitable outcome of a medical and pharma community operating under a for-profit basis. I don’t know exactly what you mean by neutered. I think that research into new compounds and therapies should be being performed on a continuous basis. I think that the focus should be on curing people and consumer safety though, not on generating a profit a making up all the money invested in research.


How do you explain the fact that 80% of patent requests are for new versions of old drugs? Why is so little money spent on researching new drugs, instead of repackaging old ones?

Because old drugs give us a good starting place. For example penicillin was a great drug for a number of years. As bacteria evolved resistance to this drug, new drugs had to be discovered/synthesized. In lieu of discovering new compounds, some researchers opt to discover why other compounds failed. For example if you learned penicillin resistance was granted via the ability of bacteria to break one chemical bond on the molecule, you could make them sensitive to a penicillin-like compound with a different bond in that location that the bacteria couldn’t break. Also, the technology to design drugs specifically to ‘fit’ in certain locations is relatively new… you need to have a 3D crystal structure and some decent computer power to model new compounds. Prior to this type of modeling, if drugs weren’t based on some pre-established design, it was pretty much of a ‘shotgun’ approach to design.


Why is R&D so obsessively focused on big money, small impact things like allergies, headaches, pain relief, and decongestants?

I think you answered your own question: because it’s where the money is.


Also, I know there are a number of federal grants, and I know that most research labs accept some money from the government, but the big money, the buy out, stock option, yacht, house in maui, mistress in new york, these things come from liscensing deals and the transfer of information from the public domain into the private copyrighted zone

Absolutely. But very rarely does this happen for any individual scientist. Most scientists I know are not wealthy. Most scientists I know didn’t get into for it the money. Believe me, if you want to make good money, there are much more reliable paths than getting a Ph.D. Getting a Ph.D. doesn’t insure upper middle class that’s for sure. With all the different things I do, I do okay, but If I had just a single job… I could probably outearn my wife, an RN with only a 2 year degree, but not by much.


I think we have much in common in the fact that we both perceive many of the problems that come with a capitalist society and the pressure that puts on scientists who are supposed to be helping people.

Agreed.


Where we differ is you don't seem to be able to allow for the sort of human cruelty and greed that I've seen and can testify to.

Untrue. Hell, I live in Phoenix, which I consider one of the worst places I’ve ever lived. I know that people can be cruel, heartless, money-grubbing bastards. I don’t dispute this. I allow for it, I just don’t believe that the entire medical and research communities are in on some conspiracy. I don’t deny that there are certain individuals in these fields that are in it strictly for themselves, and many of these people may be in charge.

BUT, the topic of this thread is not do you believe that people can be heartless, cruel, money-grubbing bastards; the topic of this thread is the suppression of ‘silver bullet’ medical cures. I don’t believe this is happening… not because it couldn’t happen, but because I don’t believe that there exists a ‘silver bullet’ medical cure for a disease like cancer. I touched on my reasons for this above.


I think many people have a hard time accepting the changes occuring in America because of their sheer magnitude.

People are afraid of all change… large and small.


" What's your opinion on cigarettes? Are they the scapegoat for forest fires and nuclear tests? I think so...

My opinion on cigarettes: smoke ‘em if you got ‘em, but understand that in addition to tarring up your lungs, your going to be inhaling inordinate amounts of radioactive material. It’s not so much the tar that bugs me, as much as the nicotine and radioactivity. Not sure what exactly the forest fire and nuclear test comments were referring to. Perhaps you can elaborate.

Thanks again for you post.



posted on Feb, 25 2005 @ 07:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by mattison0922
Thanks for a lucid, well written, thoughtful post!



No thanks necessary, give a little get a little. I think the only way to encourage the exchange of ideas is to reciprocate respect. If I ever appear argumentative, it's because I love a good argument, but I also understand the real human diffrerence between disagreement and fighting. I think the basis of man's triumph of reaon over fear is evidenced in conversation.


Originally posted by mattison0922
I am unaware of the conspiracy surrounding potassium. Got any links? I was under the impression that there was no USRDA (not saying the USRDA is necessarily sufficient in it’s recommendations) but something like 2g was suggested. Why do you need to buy potassium? It’s in all kinds of fresh foods.


www.newmediaexplorer.org...

www.ipm.iastate.edu...

members.tripod.com...

www.brc.dcs.gla.ac.uk...
A good number of somewhat relevant studies, perhaps useful in determining who might have an interest in the problem...Hydrogen peroxide apparently aids in the intake of K for plants. I remember Vialls mentioning something about K as well. I'll find and post the link.

www.vialls.com...
Smoking prevents cancer?

www.vialls.com...
Here's the essay he wrote on K deficiency.

www.vialls.com...
Okay, so that's where I got B17 from, I haven't found anything else yet regarding it. Your opinion?

www.usyd.edu.au...
A problem to be considered.

www.ahdairy.com...
Cows are all deficient in K apparently. Hmmm..that got me thinking.

www.nlm.nih.gov...
I'm going to go out on a limb and theorize that K deficiency could be partly responsible for the body's inability to process folded proteins...Nothing a few million dollars couldn't disprove...

www.drmirkin.com...
A culture of alcohol consumption doesn't help, and should be discouraged given the obvious health risks associated with getting drunk enough to vomit.

edis.ifas.ufl.edu...
First line: "Perhaps the most distinctive observation about citrus nutrition is the variety of nutrient deficiencies that can appear under intensive cultivation." - this is universal among plants grown in soil, and reversible using hemp as a bumper crop.

www.knowledgebank.irri.org...
More complete mechanisms of soil-plant K exchange.

www.chclibrary.org...
Diuretics used to treat hypertension cause K deficiency that increases hypertension. Common problem? I also understand many synthetic drugs and other natural treatments decrease the body's ability to utilize K.

www.ithyroid.com...
What's your opinion on this one? Quack?

www.ithyroid.com...
Here's another from the same source.

www.clinchem.org...
I believe a large percentage of people are deficient without knowing it. (Strange, I've been saying that all my life and only now realize why.


www.yankton.net...
K deficiency is often misdiagnosed as insect damage, compounding the problem and giving some clue as to the number of 'empty' foods people eat. I believe a true, detailed, thoughtful analysis will reveal the real situation with the food we eat.


Originally posted by mattison0922
Certainly there exist studies suggesting that food is in fact less nutritious today than it was in the past, but lots of people live to be older than they have in the past, with an acceptable quality of life. Doesn’t this alone suggest that one can in fact sustain themselves on the food that exists today? I am very particular about what I eat… not suggesting that most other Americans are but I am personally.


I'm not sure, to answer your question. Obviously the food isn't completely 'hollow' but I believe it's getting more so. This is also a relatively silent problem, but the effects could be far reaching indeed. K deficiency often has a long and crippling progression from deficiency to death, and I think because so many of the symptoms are misdiagnosed and mis treated, we're not aware of the full scope of the problem. I am not so much concerned about taking care of my body as I am about using what time I have well. Because I can't insure against a meteor or a tidal wave, I simply live every minute as I wish, and do what I can to make a better place for my children while I'm around.


Originally posted by mattison0922
Okay… I can certainly acknowledge the western medicine is completely incorrect in it’s approach to battling many, or even most disorders. I personally believe that focusing on symptom relief and isolated organs and systems, and calling that curing diseases is wrong. I am further willing to acknowledge that there are holistic cures appear to be effective in certain instances. Hell, I even thought about going into Chinese medicine before doing grad. School… but I enjoyed the actual science, which somewhat lacking in Chinese med (not slamming Chinese med).


No offense taken, I'm sure. I have always been a proponent of balance, and blending. I believe race mixing is the key to increase our survivability, I believe intelectual cross-polination is the key to intelectual advancement, and I believe combining the best of Eastern and Western medicine is the best approach. The approach of Eastern medicine is admirable, and the intuition it possesses. The deep, analytical nature of Western medicine is equally useful. Combining the two, treatment and diagnosis, is the key.


Originally posted by mattison0922
Certainly journals have content that they consider unacceptable, and the medical community does dismiss some ideas, concepts, and techniques that most likely have some value as quackery. But this is distinctly different from a community wide conspiracy to suppress these things. And many MD’s, PhD’s and other ‘doctors’ often simply accept what their establishment feeds them… and don’t think and research for themselves (sadly), they are not out to suppress cures. I think it could be in some instances lack of critical thinking and personal evaluation of evidence, not necessarily a conspiracy.


Agreed. Hubris in some cases and greed in others. A conspiracy of individual failures if you will. The puppet masters exploit the weaknesses of others for increased personal gain, as in every other situation.


Originally posted by mattison0922
Okay… so far many cases has amounted to a single case in Austrailia, about which I am unable to comment, because you don’t know the source. Do you have any other examples?


www.posh-uk.org.uk...
This seems to support my allegation, but to be honest I made it with more passion than proof at hand. I assume that the same tactics are used in the medical profession as are used in other fields where men seek to control other men. Much of the scandal and bloodshed of politics and military life is probably avoided in the medical profession though. Scientists don't hold up as well under pressure as SEALs.


Originally posted by mattison0922
While I certainly believe that current Federal policies with respect to marijuana are a joke and are completely hypocritical, I am unaware of marijuana being known for curing any diseases, though I am aware of the benefits of using marijuana in certain instances to alleviate disease symptoms and other difficulties. Furthermore, I can’t say that I am not known to indulge on occasion.


Perhaps prevent would have been a better statment. Prevention and treatment is still a strong combo. And I believe there is some research that suggests once cannabanoid receptors on an alzheimers patient's brain are reactivated, symptoms only return once the receptors have returned to rot, after another prolonged period of rest. Add that to placebo affect and you have a silver bullet for a LOT of illnesses. People forget the power of the mind, and marijuana stimulates the mind in a very unique way. It makes random connections in many cases, seemingly random anyway. It's searching for pattern, and opening up thought paths long unused. I think it is a valuable tool in the only kind of eugenics I'll coutenance - bloodless eugenics.


Originally posted by mattison0922
The problem is that there will likely never be a cure-all drug for cancer. Cancer is a disease that is defined by multiple genetic factors. There can be considerable variation in cancer cells within a single patient, there can be striking variation between the ‘same’ cancers in different individuals. This is what makes the disease so difficult to combat. It’s not like a bacterial infection where antibiotics kill off a single variety of attacker. In cancer there are multiple different varieties of attackers…even within the same disease..That’s what immune systems are for. IMO, it’s more a matter of removing the immunosuppressive or mutagenic compounds that created and/or allowed the disease to proliferate in the first place.


Agreed. There will never be a cure all drug. There will be however be a silver bullet therapy, of that I'm supremely confident. I believe a combination of undersanding the problem and understanding the root cause will provide an answer beautiful in its simplicity. Isn't that the way of all things? Virus vectors will likely perform the same task that bacteriophages are being called on for.

I also strongly approve of limited dose chemo-implants, and the further we advance the smaller and more targeted they become. The immune system is an 800 lb gorilla when it gets mad, but the enemy is always evolving to stay under the radar. We're locked in a dance that will go on forever, but the best we can do is try to prepare for every eventuality possible. The infections and cancers get stealithier and hardier, our detection methods get smarter and our treatments progress.

The source of the cancer (not the organ, the cause), needs to be identified FOR EVERY PATIENT, as part of the normal diagnosis, and that is simply not done. People say "It's too hard, too time consuming, too expensive." We HAVE to find a way, it will make the next step possible.

If you're interested in some anecdotal evidence, a friend of mine had a father at Pfizer in the mid-late 90's. He said they were keeping something under wraps, something big. He said he knew it involved cancer, and the process of metastasizing, but that was all he'd say. He didn't know why they were holding it back, he got fired before he could ask. He wasn't a stable individual and I personally would not testify to this, but there it is.


Originally posted by mattison0922
Mostly… I consider myself separate from all this…Hell, I always say that probably less than 1000 people in the world are actually interested in the research I do.


Yeah, we got tons in common.
I'm a gnostic, my majority audience died out about 1500 years ago. I've got no demographic...



Originally posted by mattison0922
On the other hand, I do work with a company that is developing handheld bioterrorist agent sensors. Generally these devices are going to be distributed to soldiers in the field, and air sampling versions will eventually be mounted in cities and airports across the US. And I guess on a third hand, I do write a decent amount of bioethics stuff. I am particularly concerned about GMO’s, and the ever so subtle ‘backdooring’ of eugenics into an acceptable place in mainstream society. The eugenics thing in particular bugs me… I lose sleep over it. I am interested to hear your reaction to these things.


It sounds like you're soon to become a rich man too busy to spend his money.

You're in a good sector already lifting off, and your interests are noble, that could cause some conflict given the interesting situation science occupies in this country now. I'll be truly interested to see the debate on stem cells and GM foods spill over into mainstream, water cooler debate. All it takes is one disaster, and the whole wide world is doomed. Then again, how is that any different from any other day?



Originally posted by mattison0922
The fluoride thing is an entirely different issue – and I agree with you. Flouridation of water is not only completely unnecessary, but is most likely in fact, extremely harmful. Do you happen to know the source of these flourides? It’s NOT the NaF that is contained in your toothpaste (BTW, I DO use fluoridated toothpaste), it’s actually flourohydrasilicates. From what I understand the best source of this the ‘scrubbers’ that are contained within industrial smoke stacks. Some scientists are speaking about this. Most others I would imagine are unaware. You should see the looks I get from my colleagues at the suggestion that Aspartame might not be such a great thing to consume. I can piss an entire room full of my colleagues off by merely suggesting that genetic engineering could have harmful consequences, but I don’t think these things are conspiracy as much as they are ignorance. Even scientists, or maybe especially scientists often just accept what other scientists tell them at face value. I’ve always been particularly astonished by this. I got into science because I ENJOY finding things out for myself.


I think the medical profession needs more yous and fewer thems. How can society work towards this? Doesn't it start with a massive purge of the medical institution. There are too many instanced of collusion between pharmaceutical interests and oversight entities, such as the FDA and NIH, the AMA has its own sordid history. Doctors take their guidelines from these professional politicians! That is surreal, and I keep pinching myself but I don't wake up. Do you know of any cases similar to that of Trey Sunderland? I know it's not unique, but this sort of thing can't compete with car wrecks, the war, mad cow, and other news.


Originally posted by mattison0922
I think it’s an inevitable outcome of a medical and pharma community operating under a for-profit basis. I don’t know exactly what you mean by neutered. I think that research into new compounds and therapies should be being performed on a continuous basis. I think that the focus should be on curing people and consumer safety though, not on generating a profit a making up all the money invested in research.


I agree with you on profit of course, it should take a back seat in certain industries. I mean kept from proliferating. The corporate entities should be emasculated, have their assetts and power removed and relocated to individual scientists working on important research. Their corporate sway should be crushed by removing all ties between the drug, oil, and chemical companies. STRICT laws enforcing fair competition and bag limits for money, just like game limits in hunting. I think it's the only logical thing to do. Tax the wealthy, to encourage research into the betterment of our overall quality of life as a species, and not to maintain the lazy poor while ignoring the working, suffering poor damnit! People need to be helped, but only in so far as society needs to change and then the poeple must toe the line. The real goal should be our collective future, not welfare or missle defense, but long term space exploration/colonization, and medical breakthroughs.


Originally posted by mattison0922
Most scientists I know are not wealthy. Most scientists I know didn’t get into for it the money. Believe me, if you want to make good money, there are much more reliable paths than getting a Ph.D. Getting a Ph.D. doesn’t insure upper middle class that’s for sure. With all the different things I do, I do okay, but If I had just a single job… I could probably outearn my wife, an RN with only a 2 year degree, but not by much.


The problem is, as in the rest of society, we are not a true meritocracy, but an oligarchy. Scientists and professors should be given the jobs of politicians, and politicians can go back and redo all that college they slept through dreaming of their inheritance.


Originally posted by mattison0922
People are afraid of all change… large and small.


They shouldn't be. It will happen regardless of whether or not they fear it. That's like fearing the wind. Completely irrational.


Originally posted by mattison0922
My opinion on cigarettes: smoke ‘em if you got ‘em, but understand that in addition to tarring up your lungs, your going to be inhaling inordinate amounts of radioactive material. It’s not so much the tar that bugs me, as much as the nicotine and radioactivity. Not sure what exactly the forest fire and nuclear test comments were referring to. Perhaps you can elaborate.


Check out the link above, and do a search on ATS. I contributed to a thread or two, and there are at least three of relevance (if memory serves). I'll try to find the thread and bump it when I'm done writing this novel..



Originally posted by mattison0922
Thanks again for you post.


Right back at you.
Good discussion is hard to find. It needs to be more encouraged and nourished, the populace MUST retake their own minds, and start thinking for themselves, otherwise their fate is inevitable and deserved.

Edited to fix my retarded use of quotes.



[edit on 25-2-2005 by WyrdeOne]



posted on Feb, 25 2005 @ 07:42 PM
link   
Type it in Google

Vitamin C Cures

What do you find?

The fact is that most people are half asleep and watch TV with hundreds of Pharmaceutical commercials. They don't drink even orange juice, and do not take Vitamin C, otherwise they would be awake.

The best is to take Vitamin C and L-Lysine as outlined by Dr. Pauling, it has been clinically proven to work like teflon for plaque in the arteries. But no, go back to sleep and watch some more commericals until you have to spend a million dollars on a heart transplant!



posted on Feb, 25 2005 @ 08:43 PM
link   
Just did a cursory search, and found a researcher specializing in proteins was just killed.

www.global-elite.org...

This is supposedly an updated list, but it's incomplete yet. If anyone has anything to add..

I don't want to hijack the thead, but there may be a connection between these scientists and silver bullet cures. Who knows. Just thought I'd throw it out there.



posted on Feb, 26 2005 @ 11:13 AM
link   
This is an interesting site, found on another thread which is quite beneficial regarding this thread. MATTISON, check it out!!

www.rense.com...

It's regarding a gentleman that found a cure for cancer in the 30's and how it was covered up!!



posted on Feb, 26 2005 @ 11:53 AM
link   
Wyrde,

Thanks again for your post... you've posted a lot of info... it will take me a couple of days to look over and comment on it.

Zabilgy,

Thanks for your post too. I am certainly aware of Rife. Will comment on it later. You should check out this thread regarding this topic.



[edit on 26-2-2005 by mattison0922]



posted on Feb, 26 2005 @ 12:06 PM
link   
Mattison...that's where I snagged that link from. Thought it fit this thread pretty well!!



posted on Feb, 28 2005 @ 01:23 PM
link   

If I ever appear argumentative, it's because I love a good argument, but I also understand the real human diffrerence between disagreement and fighting. I think the basis of man's triumph of reaon over fear is evidenced in conversation.

I wholeheartedly concur… I enjoy a good argument myself.
The Potassium deficiency links are interesting. I need to look into it further on my own. There does seem to be some acknowledgement by the mainstream medical community that K deficiency can cause at least some of the disorders described in the pages you cited.


www.vialls.com...
Smoking prevents cancer?

I am having some difficulties with this. Certainly that radioactive fallout etc. are bad for your lungs is not in dispute. I am troubled though when grandiose claims are made and not backed up with some sort of documentation. Every study I’ve ever read seems to indicate that people who smoke cigs are more likely to get lung cancer. Several medical studies seem to indicate that the best way to expose your lungs to radiation is via tobacco smoke. Tobacco seems to concentrate Polonium in its tissues… more so than other plants. I am somewhat skeptical of this claim. Now this isn’t to say that the statements about radioactive fallout are without merit, because those ARE IMO legitimate points to be considered. But pretty much everything I’ve ever read has me convinced that smoking cigs is bad… could be the typical ‘American Response’ to things though… for example, if people approached smoking a little more rationally… like say smoke 3 or 4 cigs a day, things might not be so bad. But like everything else, Americans have to consume as much of a product as is humanly possible.


www.vialls.com...
Okay, so that's where I got B17 from, I haven't found anything else yet regarding it. Your opinion?

The mechanism proposed is intriguing, but suffers from a fatal flaw. The articles states that beta-glucoronidase levels are elevated in cancer cells. This may be true of some cancer cells. But if there’s one thing that any cancer researcher will tell you about cancer, it’s that the cells are very very heterogenous. Some cancer cells may overexpress beta glucoronidase, others may not. In the case where cancer cells are not overexpressing or in fact are underexpressing this gene, somatic cells would receive the largest dose of cyanide. This is the problem with cancer… no two cancers are genetically the same, and the patterns of over/under expression differ within the same cancer types.


www.ahdairy.com...
Cows are all deficient in K apparently. Hmmm..that got me thinking.

Given the state of animal husbandry in this country… this is not surprising. I’ve been a vegetarian for about 15 years. I do consume dairy now, but ONLY organic dairy products. There’s some pretty scary stuff about rBGH and milk. For example, dairy cattle that receive rBGH have interleukin levels that are orders of magnitude higher than they should be. Interleukins have been implicated as being one of the main hormones or signaling molecules involved with the proliferation of cancers. Furthermore, the problem isn’t limited to just interleukins. Cows that receive rBGH, generally lose weight… lots of it, but ironically, their organs actually get heavier and dump more hormones into the blood. rBGH was approved only on the idea that interleukins and other hormones didn’t make it through the digestive system in tact. Recent research has demonstrated this to be completely false. FYI, bovine and human interleukins share 100% amino acid identity.


www.nlm.nih.gov...
I'm going to go out on a limb and theorize that K deficiency could be partly responsible for the body's inability to process folded proteins...Nothing a few million dollars couldn't disprove...

Could be… many proteins though don’t need assistance folding. For many sequence info is enough. To my knowledge, K ions are not involved with the chaperonin complexes or the heat shock proteins that are involved with folding proteins… doesn’t mean a role won’t be discovered later.



www.ithyroid.com...
What's your opinion on this one? Quack?

I can’t comment on this yet. This site puts forth some interesting info… of course none of it is backed with a bibliography. This makes tracking down information particularly difficult. I really don’t like it when people don’t reference their writings. All of this info would take me weeks to track down and thoroughly evaluate.


www.clinchem.org...
I believe a large percentage of people are deficient without knowing it. (Strange, I've been saying that all my life and only now realize why.

This wouldn’t surprise me about much people in this country suffering deficiencies… this is a huge junk food culture… which you cover in your quote below.


www.yankton.net...
K deficiency is often misdiagnosed as insect damage, compounding the problem and giving some clue as to the number of 'empty' foods people eat. I believe a true, detailed, thoughtful analysis will reveal the real situation with the food we eat.


Obviously the food isn't completely 'hollow' but I believe it's getting more so. This is also a relatively silent problem, but the effects could be far reaching indeed.

Agreed. But isn’t the solution just to eat foods grown in the healthiest soils possible and to minimize junk food consumption. We pretty much eat all organic… sometimes certain fruits are tough to find in the organic section so we’ll go conventional, but if eating organic foods grown in rich soil isn’t a solution than what is? I personally hate taking supplements. I really believe that the food I eat should be able to keep me healthy provided I make reasonable choices.

I believe combining the best of Eastern and Western medicine is the best approach. The approach of Eastern medicine is admirable, and the intuition it possesses. The deep, analytical nature of Western medicine is equally useful. Combining the two, treatment and diagnosis, is the key.

Agreed. It’s tough to straddle both worlds though… often I feel like an outsider in both places. Most in the alternative healing community associate scientists with all the evils of western medicine, then on the other hand, many in the science community regard alternative healers as quacks and alternative therapies as chicanery. It’s sometimes not the most comfortable place to be.

People forget the power of the mind, and marijuana stimulates the mind in a very unique way. It makes random connections in many cases, seemingly random anyway. It's searching for pattern, and opening up thought paths long unused.

It certainly has given me different perspectives on issues than I might have obtained otherwise… hell, I’ve often said pot is the only thing that permitted me to sit through statistics and physical chemistry.

Agreed. There will never be a cure all drug. There will be however be a silver bullet therapy, of that I'm supremely confident.

Perhaps you can elaborate on the difference between silver bullet cures and silver bullet therapy.

Virus vectors will likely perform the same task that bacteriophages are being called on for.

A colleague of mine is actually working on this. He’s attempting to develop vaccinia virus into an anti cancer virus, that specifically and selectively infects and kills cancer cells. Some of the preliminary work he’s done with this is very promising and extremely intriguing.


The source of the cancer (not the organ, the cause), needs to be identified FOR EVERY PATIENT, as part of the normal diagnosis, and that is simply not done. People say "It's too hard, too time consuming, too expensive." We HAVE to find a way, it will make the next step possible.

This will happen. Molecular profiling is pretty much the next major revolution in diagnostics. Currently the data bases are being built… once a certain level of statistical significance has been reached, this field will take off. People are doing these molecular profiles on pretty much every body fluid imaginable. The future of medicine (western) is analyzing multiple different proteins simultaneously and their interactions. This technology is going to come to fruition over the next 10-20 years. It’s limited currently by statistical significance of the databases, and the infrastructure necessary to perform such tests. Generally, a $500,000 mass spec is necessary. Although this technology is evolving too. There are several companies developing hand held mass specs. When that technology comes around, it’s going to change everything.


Yeah, we got tons in common. I'm a gnostic, my majority audience died out about 1500 years ago. I've got no demographic...

I am pretty unfamiliar with Gnosticism. Sort of a version of Christianity though isn’t it? Links?

It sounds like you're soon to become a rich man too busy to spend his money.
You're in a good sector already lifting off, and your interests are noble, that could cause some conflict given the interesting situation science occupies in this country now. I'll be truly interested to see the debate on stem cells and GM foods spill over into mainstream, water cooler debate.

Actually, I am planning on leaving the biodefense industry… this work doesn’t make happy, and I think living in Phoenix sucks. I really want to feel satisfied by my job, and this isn’t doing it. Furthermore… I am not going to let my job dictate where I live. So… we’re packing up our stuff and moving to rural NC.

Do you know of any cases similar to that of Trey Sunderland? I know it's not unique, but this sort of thing can't compete with car wrecks, the war, mad cow, and other news.

I don’t off the top of my head… the Sunderland thing though… is bad for science in general. I’ve no illusions about the objectivity of many researchers though.



posted on Feb, 28 2005 @ 01:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zabilgy
This is an interesting site, found on another thread which is quite beneficial regarding this thread. MATTISON, check it out!!

www.rense.com...

It's regarding a gentleman that found a cure for cancer in the 30's and how it was covered up!!


Well... despite the fact that this 'cure' has been covered up, Rife machines are readily available. You can order one off the internet from a wide variety of sources.



posted on Mar, 3 2005 @ 08:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by mattison0922
Tobacco seems to concentrate Polonium in its tissues… more so than other plants.


Polonium is one of the rarest metals on earth is it not? I was under the impression that it decayed very rapidly, let off a lot of heat through this decay, and generally is not stable outside of the minute concentrations found in Uranium ore. It's so rare, that those companies who manufacture it charge obscene amounts for the end product.

The properties of the metal would seem to make it poorly suited to absorbtion by plants, though it is semi-soluble in alkali, which makes some sense as to why it would end up in tobacco... I know the lethal dosage is quite small, on the order of less than a tenth of a micro curie, so if it's heavily concentrated in tobacco plant matter, wouldn't the Native Americans have been dropping like flies with every hit off the peace pipe?

I've also heard stories that the types of cancer surfacing since mass produced cigarettes took off are markedly different from the types of cancer suffered from in earlier times. Can you confirm this, and would it tend to implicate the production methods or growing methods rather than the actual drug itself?

I suspect the ammonia used in modern cigarettes might be principally responsible. Those grey lines down the shaft of the cig are sprayed on anhydrous ammonia if I'm not mistaken. That could be a more likely culprit, what do you think? I haven't been able to find any evidence of controls placed on the ammonia used by tobacco companies, and I haven't been able to find any research to indicate scientists have even considered this possibility. There is most definitely a link between Polonium and Ammonia, whether or not the Ammonia in the cigarettes is the source of the Polonium that seems to be killing smokers, well, only research will tell.


Originally posted by mattison0922
I am somewhat skeptical of this claim. Now this isn’t to say that the statements about radioactive fallout are without merit, because those ARE IMO legitimate points to be considered. But pretty much everything I’ve ever read has me convinced that smoking cigs is bad… could be the typical ‘American Response’ to things though… for example, if people approached smoking a little more rationally… like say smoke 3 or 4 cigs a day, things might not be so bad. But like everything else, Americans have to consume as much of a product as is humanly possible.


Aint that the truth.. America, home of the Double Whopper, the Super Sized Extra Value Meal, the Hummer, the mile long buffet, I could go on and on. I'm sure moderation would mitigate the health problems of tobacco users, especially concerning emphysema and COPD, which are more concretely linked to tobacco use than cancer ever has been.

There is definitely a link between nuclear testing and cancer. You can't put millions of radioactive particles into the upper aptmosphere and expect them to disappear. The government needs to come clean, but of course they can't because it would amount to suicide. They found a scapegoat and most people are none the wiser, just getting sicker.

I'm sure cigarettes can cause cancer, that's pretty much without doubt. Likewise, water can cause cancer, as can dirt, and sand, and beef, and oreo cookies. If a radioactive particle makes its way into your body using whatever vector, it's pretty much a foregone conclusion that you're going to devlop a malignancy.

Certainly tobacco isn't the only source of radiation, nor is it even close to being the primary contributing factor in cancer, so why are we led to believe it is? The government 'public awareness' campaign against tobacco seems to me like a poorly concealed effort to redirect public anger away from the government.


Originally posted by mattison0922
The mechanism proposed is intriguing, but suffers from a fatal flaw. The articles states that beta-glucoronidase levels are elevated in cancer cells. This may be true of some cancer cells. But if there’s one thing that any cancer researcher will tell you about cancer, it’s that the cells are very very heterogenous. Some cancer cells may overexpress beta glucoronidase, others may not. In the case where cancer cells are not overexpressing or in fact are underexpressing this gene, somatic cells would receive the largest dose of cyanide. This is the problem with cancer… no two cancers are genetically the same, and the patterns of over/under expression differ within the same cancer types.


That's also very true, cancer is a many headed beast to say the least. However, this vitamin could prove a valuable tool in stopping some of the more virulent cancers from metastasizing out of control. It could also be used in situations where the patient's health is too weak to consider typical therapies like radiation and poison, I mean chemo.
In any case, I think a great deal more research is needed to identify the benefits of B17, and that sort of research is going to be hard to do for the same reason marijuana research is difficult.

The government has made a naturally occuring substance illegal, several actually, and that is slowing down the progress of all mankind. I can't imagine a more pompous stance, 'God made a mistake and we, your loving government, are correcting it for him.'




Originally posted by mattison0922
Given the state of animal husbandry in this country… this is not surprising. I’ve been a vegetarian for about 15 years. I do consume dairy now, but ONLY organic dairy products. There’s some pretty scary stuff about rBGH and milk. For example, dairy cattle that receive rBGH have interleukin levels that are orders of magnitude higher than they should be. Interleukins have been implicated as being one of the main hormones or signaling molecules involved with the proliferation of cancers. Furthermore, the problem isn’t limited to just interleukins. Cows that receive rBGH, generally lose weight… lots of it, but ironically, their organs actually get heavier and dump more hormones into the blood. rBGH was approved only on the idea that interleukins and other hormones didn’t make it through the digestive system in tact. Recent research has demonstrated this to be completely false. FYI, bovine and human interleukins share 100% amino acid identity.


I'm sure in some alien bestiary, we are classified as a cow parasite, which is sort of depressing and beautifully ironic at the same time. I personally am past the point of worrying about what I eat and drink, because I have shed my fear of death. Still, I am greatly upset by the fact that so many Americans place trust in their government (regulatory agencies) to care for them. I can't imagine a decision more solidly rooted in ignorance.

I think anyone who wants to live a long and healthy life would do well to grow their own food, kill their television, and bury it in the back yard along with every piece of plastic they own.


Originally posted by mattison0922
Could be… many proteins though don’t need assistance folding. For many sequence info is enough. To my knowledge, K ions are not involved with the chaperonin complexes or the heat shock proteins that are involved with folding proteins… doesn’t mean a role won’t be discovered later.


I think you misunderstood, I wasn't saying that K causes the folding (though I suppose it could), rather, K might be necessary to bind and remove the misfolded proteins before they can pile up. K is passed through the body incredibly quickly, probably quicker than any other mineral, no? If you were going to bind trash to any ion for speedy removal, K would be the one, right? I'm talking out of my ass here, I have no basis other than unfounded speculation, so don't lose any sleep over my theory.



Originally posted by mattison0922
This wouldn’t surprise me about much people in this country suffering deficiencies… this is a huge junk food culture… which you cover in your quote below.


Researchers at Berkley found that soda accounts for anywhere from 7% - 25% of American's daily calories - by far the largest single source! Wow! I mean..Wow.... I myself drink 4 litres of Mountain Dew a day, give or take a litre. My sugar consumption allows me to get by on one meal a day, if I didn't have soda I would have NO energy. It's obviously a very unhealthy lifestyle Americans practice, but I can't help but thinking they were raised that way. We're living in a convenience culture, and we're paying for it with the second half of our lives.

According to those same researchers, alcohol, sweets, and soda combined account for fully one third of the average American's diet. That just blows my mind, but I can't say I'm surprised. It's just that looking at those figures really makes one wonder how our bodies can deal with all the crap we put in them. The human body really is a marvellous machine, and we are pushing it beyond its considerable means. I really am in awe of the body's ability to cope with our brain's stupidity.


Originally posted by mattison0922
But isn’t the solution just to eat foods grown in the healthiest soils possible and to minimize junk food consumption. We pretty much eat all organic… sometimes certain fruits are tough to find in the organic section so we’ll go conventional, but if eating organic foods grown in rich soil isn’t a solution than what is? I personally hate taking supplements. I really believe that the food I eat should be able to keep me healthy provided I make reasonable choices.


Well, we really don't know. Detailed nutrient analysis isn't performed on either organic or commercial produce, so there's no way of knowing whether or not you're getting everything that you need. I think the only sensible thing to do is grow your own food, but that's becoming increasingly difficult as our lives get more and more hectic, and our brains get more and more accustomed to having their needs instantly gratified.

I don't agree with widespread supplement use either, I think the danger of overdose far outweighs the benefit. My friend's mother has this lazy susan on her dining room table, it's 'home' for all her supplements. I spun it around one day and read all the labels, mostly out of boredom while waiting for my friend. Some of her supplements were 2000% RDV. That stunned me, and when I asked, her reply was 'can't have too much of a good thing.' I vehemently disagreed with her and told her if she didn't believe me, she should try drinking more than a gallon of water in one sitting. She didn't want to hear it of course, and I think she is representative of the widely held misconception that vitamins are good for you in any dosage, no matter how obscene.




Originally posted by mattison0922
Agreed. It’s tough to straddle both worlds though… often I feel like an outsider in both places. Most in the alternative healing community associate scientists with all the evils of western medicine, then on the other hand, many in the science community regard alternative healers as quacks and alternative therapies as chicanery. It’s sometimes not the most comfortable place to be.


Hell, any cattle rancher who's sat on a fence can tell you that! LOL There's nothing comfortable about straddling the fence, but sometimes it's the only sensible place to sit. I agree that many people are extremist in their views, and that's never healthy. I've known people who were involved in alternative medicine, who were incredibly astute regarding the failures of traditional medicine, but had absolutely no skepticism regarding alternative therapies. That sort of extremism, that sort of ignorance, is no better than any other sort. Accupuncture is a good example, because while it is versatile, there are many who will claim it can cure any illness. That's not science, or medicine, that's wishful thinking.


Originally posted by mattison0922
Perhaps you can elaborate on the difference between silver bullet cures and silver bullet therapy.


Gene therapy is very promising, if we could develop a way to completely understand the system we're mucking with, we might be able to effectively use it to treat any illness. There is an underlying system that we have to understand first, and I understand fully how complex it is, but computers are helping us a great deal. If we can actually identify the interactions between 'code' and 'construct' we can essentially rebuild the human body on the fly, in any conceivable configuration - with the purpose of course being treatment, prevention, or alleviation of the symptoms of disease.

The trick is understanding, and I think laymen overestimate the limits of modern scientific knowledge. Most people think DNA is old news, that the mapping of the genome solved the riddle. LOL The mapping just clarified the riddle, it didn't even come close to solving it. We still have absolutely no idea how 90% of the human body's processes function, and we have a very limited understanding of the body systems' interactions with one another - that's critical.

We have as much chance of causing more harm, as we do of curing an illness, with todays tech. I have confidence though, that with new diagnostic tools, and a more refined understanding of the complexities we're dealing with, we can essentially adapt a single 'base' strategy to treat nearly any condition.

Got a bum liver? Liquify and regrow it, molecule by molecule, using 'pure' genetic information gathered at birth. One problem with the human body is that it keeps its own blueprints and they get damaged over time, so a 'perfect' set of schematics would be needed, but aside from that, I don't see any reason why gene therapy wouldn't work to cure every conceivable illness/damage.

One problem that needs to be overcome if one wishes to heal the body rapidly, is cellular growth rate, which slows considerably after the first few years of life, and eventually reverses. Cancer could be the answer to that problem, or stem cells. Wouldn't it be nifty to cure cancer with cancer? With gene therapy, cancer cells might be persuaded to actually replicate into functioning cells, cells the body needs.


Originally posted by mattison0922
A colleague of mine is actually working on this. He’s attempting to develop vaccinia virus into an anti cancer virus, that specifically and selectively infects and kills cancer cells. Some of the preliminary work he’s done with this is very promising and extremely intriguing.


That's awesome! Buy that man a beer for me! That would pretty cool, if ten years from now you could say "I knew the guy who cured cancer."


Originally posted by mattison0922
Furthermore… I am not going to let my job dictate where I live. So… we’re packing up our stuff and moving to rural NC.


Good for you! It's a shame to see so many people wearing golden shackles. They desire them, but hate the consequences of that desire. It's a real problem in society. NC is a wonderful place to live, as long as you're not on the coast. When you get there, look up my buddy David Boltt and check out his tattoo studio. He does some world class work, and is high on the list of the ten best tattoo artists in America. I don't know if it's your bag, but you can check out his portfolio here: www.artspace.com...

Sorry it took me so long to reply, I've been neck deep in abstracts because of this thread, the evolution thread, and a topic I had planned on posting. On top of that, I got the flu two days ago and was sick as a dog for a day and a half. Now I'm feeling fine, my immune system worked its mojo, but my sinuses were at like 10,000 psi for about a day, it hurt like hell.



posted on Mar, 9 2005 @ 04:46 PM
link   
:Bump:

This thread deserves some more attention. Maybe we'll get some fresh blood now.



posted on Mar, 10 2005 @ 12:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
:Bump:

This thread deserves some more attention. Maybe we'll get some fresh blood now.



Wyrde... I am so sorry... I've been meaning to get back to you. It's just been insanely busy. While I feel okay responding to certain things 'off the cuff,' but your posts require a bit more research. I've been pretty busy at work lately as we've recently moved, most of my ATS stuff is done at work these days, and it's computer access has been pretty lean... will get back to you soon. Sorry again.

M



posted on Mar, 10 2005 @ 12:55 AM
link   
Great info guys, keep it up! I can't add much to the discussion at this point but I hope I can jump in once a little more research is done on my part. One thing I can add is the fact that I personally have started taking about 1200 mg of vitamin C a day and I feel much better than before I started this regimen. I read up on what Pauling suggested and so far I do feel an improvement in my over all health. I do agree that the "food" of today is definitely a watered down version of what it was 75 years ago which is why I try and at least grow as many of my own vegetables as I can. I hope we can keep this thread going as this topic needs to be discussed.



posted on Mar, 10 2005 @ 10:31 PM
link   
mattison
No apology necessary! Take your time and come back with an insightful reply, that's all I ask.
Seriously though, it's not a big deal, I understand the necessity of attending to real life. If you notice, I still haven't composed my reply to our discussion on evolution on that other thread. So, no worries.



Originally posted by skychief
One thing I can add is the fact that I personally have started taking about 1200 mg of vitamin C a day and I feel much better than before I started this regimen. I read up on what Pauling suggested and so far I do feel an improvement in my over all health. I do agree that the "food" of today is definitely a watered down version of what it was 75 years ago which is why I try and at least grow as many of my own vegetables as I can. I hope we can keep this thread going as this topic needs to be discussed.


That's awesome that you've noticed a change! I myself have been making sure to maintain a good vitamin C intake, especially during Flu season. I didn't get vaccinated (don't want the mercury poisoning thank you very much) and I did get the flu, but it only lasted two days and I recovered fully without medications. Focus on good health, and it should continue and become more pronounced. The human body has a wonderful knack for tricking itself into wellness. Obviously we need proper nutrition, but wellness is as much a state of mind as of body.




top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join