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.
Originally posted by bsl4doc
Can you qualify this with evidence?
you see, growing a fungus is something even ants can do, don't need a lab for that, bacteriopahges are similar, just need a 2 step process.. wait, do you even know how effective and efficient phages are? have you ever used them? heard of them? no? why is that? because you're mind controlled, that's why.
i don't mean to insult you, but please, please look beyond and understand that our entire society is based on control. THAT's why microchips, as small as a fingernail are produced in large complex production plants, why chemical antibiotics are preferred over phages, because phages regrow themselves, you couldn't sell them, everyone could cultivate the stuff and it doesn't take repeated doses, because they are capable of self-replication.
Originally posted by bsl4doc
..
If we made phages specifically for killing, oh, let's say ..brucella, and then we just allowed them to self replicate in tissue cultures and continued to use them, they may eventually mutate into something extremely harmful. It would take a dosage of hundred of particles of phages to conbat a full fledged infection in a patient, but only one harmful phage to start the cascade that is a harmful infection. And as far as "anyone" being able to cultivate phages. Have you ever done this? It is EXTREMELY hard to do with some of them. T4 phages, yes, are easy to cultivate, but do you think everyone could afford to constant live tissue cultures? They get pretty pricy. Can you show me where to get cheap live tissue cultures and phage samples? I'd really appreciate it.
..
quote: Monday, October 31, 2005. Phages: A New Way to Fight Bad Germs
Back in June I was amazed at this story in Wired about phages, bacteria-eating viruses that could be the answer to antibiotic resistance. The first treatment to use the therapy could be available this year.
"Half a century ago, antibiotics revolutionized medicine by turning many once-deadly infections like tuberculosis into minor impediments. But overuse is rapidly rendering antibiotics ineffective, and scientists know they need a replacement fast. One of the most promising options is one that's been used in Eastern Europe and Russia for decades: bacteriophage therapy
One potential drawback is that phage therapies might be too specific for widespread use against infection, according to Carl Merril, a senior investigator at the National Institutes of Health. For example, one phage might work for one strain of Streptococcus pneumoniae (the most common type of pneumonia) but not for the 27 others.
Also, I don't see how I can be mind controlled by the powers you are suggesting since I don't even live in your country. Medical care is socialized in Italy, why would I care what drug companies are doing in your nation? Maybe you people should do something about it if you have all this evidence? Apparently Soficrow thinks that some people are receiving this life extending treatment, so the first step to solving this mystery would be to find the rich 200 year old people in America and figure out where they got the treatment. Wait, there are no 200 year old people in America? Oooh, that's right, that's because there IS no life extending treatment like he's been describing.
..
And yes, I realize that all antibiotics are are cultivated fungi and plants. But guess what? That tylenol you just took? Made in a laboratory because it is cheaper and easier to control concentrations of laboratory made chemicals than it is to distill it out of plants..
..
Just because someone or some culture successfully performs some task we see now as scientific does not mean they had scientific means in mind at all, or that it wasn't be complete chance or coincidence.
..
One potential drawback is that phage therapies might be too specific for widespread use against infection, according to Carl Merril, a senior investigator at the National Institutes of Health. For example, one phage might work for one strain of Streptococcus pneumoniae (the most common type of pneumonia) but not for the 27 others.
i wouldn't dismiss 200 yr old people outright, i learned about so many things in the last year i would have laughed off as pure BS in my dumber days, i don't believe i have even the slightest clue what's really going on another continent, and although i find it unlikely that some 200 year old super rich elitist is actually walking around incognito, i can't outright prove the opposite, can i?
Good that you mention plants... they can be altered through creative cross-breeding, you know, a few tribes were rather good at that, otherwise we wouldn't have tomatos, potatoes, and so on. it's obvious that lab conditions result in higher fidelity, but is it really required to obtain the desired results? i doubt it and to top it off, many plants don't need refinement or destillation
Yes, see the comment on phages, you don't need to know the exact mechanism to use it, that's the whole point, you know, if you follow the first link, you'll see that all that was required for replicating phages was fermenting a bottle of nutritious solution with the desired target germ (available from patient) then adding a wide variety of life-form-rich compounds and solutions, in this case raw sewage... the effect is very visible.
from that point, replication is obviously child's play, just need to find out how long it can be safely stored without irrecoverable deterioration. hardly sophisticaed tech, is it?
Not do diss the scientific method, but people need to actually use it and stop pretending they know everything. unexplained phenomena need to be investigated, not ignored and denied. Unfortunately, there are far too many 'easy' explanation which keep people inside a close-minded world of their own without the faintest clue where to look. (and that includes myself - to an hopefully lesser extent, though)
bsl4doc
No, Long Lance, I have never heard of phages despite the fact that my father and now I have performed work in acadaemia on genetics. < /sarcasm >
bsl4doc
Apparently Soficrow thinks that some people are receiving this life extending treatment,
bsl4doc
Even though we knew about stem cells in the 40s, it doesn't mean we could use them properly or at all. We knew about DNA in the late 30s, but had no idea and still have no idea how to completely harness it's power.
bsl4doc
Just because someone or some culture successfully performs some task we see now as scientific does not mean they had scientific means in mind at all, or that it wasn't be complete chance or coincidence. ...Just because we know something about something, doesn't mean we immediately apply it as a treatment, drug, or scientific theory.
bsl4doc
Now, remind me why it would be more efficient and safe to pump someone full of viruses when it may not even work for that strain?
bsl4doc
when you culture phages, they have to grow on live tissue or bacterial layers. That is more costly than making antibiotics.
bsl4doc
So now my knowledge from personal, actual factual lab assistant work, 4 years of undergrad biology, 3 years of medical school, and 3 years of laboratory research amounts to me ignoring and denying things which are full of holes?
bsl4doc
Face it, you gave it the old college try, but game over.
bsl4doc
Long Lance, I don't know why you had to make some of your comments towards me to brash and rude.
curiosity:
"Living forever ?
Sorry, forgot to include my reasoning for the previous posting to be done on this subject board:
Is it possible that the recipients of medical payments, doctors, hospitals, etc, are among those who have kept this knowledge from being taught in churches? If there is any truth to that, how is it possible that they have been able to so effect the teaching of the church?
One passage the pastor has said demonstrates the "living forever" thesis is John 11:25-26 which states "Jesus said unto her, 'I am the Resurrection and the Life, he that believeth in Me, though he were dead yet shall he live and whosoever liveth and believeth in Me shall never die. Believest thou this?'"
Originally posted by bsl4doc
Did you read the phage quote you cited?
..
Now, remind me why it would be more efficient and safe to pump someone full of viruses when it may not even work for that strain? Viruses can and do mutate into more harmful species, antibiotics don't. Antibiotics occur in nature, as do viruses. The coca plant has been used as a natural pain killer for hundreds of years, as have several other plants. We have just refined it. Also, as I mentioned before and you ignored, when you culture phages, they have to grow on live tissue or bacterial layers. That is more costly than making antibiotics. One antibiotic may knock out 15 out of 27 streptococcus strains, while one phage may only be specific for one, maybe two strains. How is that more effective?
No, you apparently don't have any clue as to what's going on on my continent. And what do you mean you can't prove there aren't any super rich elitist 200 year olds? Unless he is living in a cave somewhere, which would defeat the purpose of a rich elitist wanting to live to be 200 years old, don't you think people may have noticed that the same man has been around for quite some time? His medical records, military records, social security records, tax records, income records, property records, purchase records, etc. might be a good hint. You would have to bribe/control SOOO many people to hide this, it wouldn't work. The more people you include in a conspiracy, the less likely it is to work. That's a simple fact. People talk eventually.
You're right, many people ARE good at cross-breeding plants without knowledge of the botany and science behind it. Look at the Irish, they bred potatoes that would work in their rocky soil. Oooh, wait, that's right, and then the potato famine hit and their crops were destroyed, unlike the potatoes today that can be made to be highly disease resistant. Well, I guess science wins out again, huh? A knowledge of science will always produce higher quality, stronger, better foods. I'm not saying it's necessary to grow food, I'm saying a knowledge of science WILL produce better foods, however.
That's all you need, huh? Replicating phages is child's play? Okay, tell you what. I'm going to give you a 10 nl sample of T4 phage. Then, I will give you the jar of stuff you said is all you need. Now, you go ahead and culture it, and then I'll infect you with E. coli, the natural prey of T4 phages. Now, if you feel confident that those phages you're culturing haven't mutated at all, since it would only take one mutated phage to give you a nasty infection, you go ahead and chug that bottle of phages, k?
..
I'm not saying phages aren't useful, they really are. They just plain and simple are NOT a replacement for antibiotics. If they were, don't you think drug companies would jump on patents and research projects for what you call "cheaper and more effective" treatments? It would cost them less, and they could charge whatever they want if they were the only ones with a treatment available. Face it, you gave it the old college try, but game over.
..
if they mutate, which mutations will prevail in an environment full of e.coli ? those working against bacteria or human cells? mmh?
Originally posted by bsl4doc
You proved in the following quote that you obviously do not understand viral evolution, or organismal evoltuion, thus there is no real purpose for me to continue debating you on the phage topic:
if they mutate, which mutations will prevail in an environment full of e.coli ? those working against bacteria or human cells? mmh?
No, no, no. Shame on you. That is not a sound view of evoution. Yes, it is directed by the environment to an extent, but the addition of a genetics trait does NO always, or often ever, mean the deletion of an old one. Many viruses can infect multiple species of hosts. Avian flu can infect both birds AND humans. Swine flu works the same way for pigs and humans.
..
btw, the interpretation of evolution in this case depends on survival value (infecting humans is of no survival value among e.coli..) and the convenient fact that viruses can't just gather genes, for reasons of transportablity. so i'd wager addition of a new gene (note that i did't say trait) would necessarily result in the deletion of another. fancy anti-mammalian genes would probably constitute an unaffordable luxury under these conditions, wouldn't they?
correct me if i'm wrong.
Originally posted by bsl4doc
btw, the interpretation of evolution in this case depends on survival value (infecting humans is of no survival value among e.coli..) and the convenient fact that viruses can't just gather genes, for reasons of transportablity. so i'd wager addition of a new gene (note that i did't say trait) would necessarily result in the deletion of another. fancy anti-mammalian genes would probably constitute an unaffordable luxury under these conditions, wouldn't they?
correct me if i'm wrong.
Well, you invited me to correct you if you were wrong, so here we go....
..
i did not intend to change the subject, really, i was talking about the genes of the phage, which has only limited space available, in an environment full of e.coli ie. phages among e. coli. ... if you're no longer willing to discuss the subject i'll understand...
Originally posted by soficrow
curiousity -
IMO, this thread is more about getting insurance coverage for existent medical technologies to cure disease than it is about immortality. But hey, if that's what interests you, go at it.
Vive la diversite.