Morgellon's Identified!!!, page 6

Originally posted by deessell
It's also important to remember the number of microbiologist's who have been killed in the last couple of years.

Author Steve Quayle alleges that 40 microbiologist have died under suspicious circumstances in the last four years -- most of them specializing in vaccines and bio-weapons research. The deaths include stabbings, drownings, plane crashes and hit-and-run crashes. Some were ruled suicides. Theres only been several who've died of natural causes.

Source

There are other dead scientists… 44 of them, at last count. The investigation is focused on China because of a computer program called Promis. It was stolen from a Washington company called Inslaw. The president of Inslaw, , Bill Hamilton, noted that his company's software "would give any country a flying start in keeping track of just about anybody's work."

Source

Something is going on, we all know that, but what?

Good find and overlooked i thought.

Originally posted by sardion2000
I re-iterate what I said above as I was ignored.

Is there any supporting evidence of the link between Nanotechnology and Morgellons that does not come from an Activist Site? Is there any supporting evidence that morgellons exists period?(Again from somewhere else other then an Activist site)

[edit on 11-4-2007 by sardion2000]

As far as its existence is concerned, visit silentsuperbug-reference.blogspot.com...

there are other reference sites from the silentsuperbug.com scientists as well. They are not activists, and in fact, do not reference the term "morgellons" as a multi disciplined study of this infectious agent is needed before a proper name can be given to this disorder. There is no question however that the disease they are documenting and morgellons, is one and the same.



Now as far as the chemtrail connection.. I was told that there may indeed be a connection between the two, BUT NOT what most are thinking it to be.

The agent causing morgellons, is a modified cyanobacterium. One of the components most frequently discussed as a component of chemtrails is ethyl dibromide. You are likely aware that ethyl dibromide is a banned pesticide since the 1970's. This chemical causes cell lysis of many different microorganisms including cyanobacteria.

The chemtrail programs may very well be an effort in "pest control" by those whom are aware of this agents existence. Unlike the info from the links above, This chemtrail theory is merely speculation.

Originally posted by sardion2000
I re-iterate what I said above as I was ignored.

Is there any supporting evidence of the link between Nanotechnology and Morgellons that does not come from an Activist Site? Is there any supporting evidence that morgellons exists period?(Again from somewhere else other then an Activist site)

[edit on 11-4-2007 by sardion2000]

You may also find this letter from Gerberding(DIRECTOR of CDC) to senator Graham. It is undated, unfortunately, so i am unsure of exactly how long ago it was written, but I have personally had a copy since 2004.

www.crossinglines.net...

One more item to keep in mind is that Wymore of OSU as well as several other physicians, have since attempted to submit their properly acquired and stored samples to the CDC as requested in the letter referred to above. The CDC has changed their position to NOT accept these samples and does not want any information at all from those who have been researching this problem. This reversal of position is completely without logic and makes absolutely no sense at all in regards to the formal investigation they had announced but have still not started. CDC stated their investigation was to begin almost 1 full year ago, May 2006. To this date they still have done nothing, but as referenced in the 2004 letter to Senator Graham, have been aware of this disorder for "some time"

[edit on 11-4-2007 by Southcty]

Originally posted by kozmo
...You have not failed to astound! I found some very interesting YouTube videos of purported (Notice how I say "purported" - because I can't confirm this) Morgellon's fibers. They exhibit some very interesting behavioral characteristics. Take a look and then I will add my 2 cents:

The first thing that struck me is that there's no audio and no explaination. We're shown "parts" of ...something... and are told this is Morgellon's fibers. In truth, it could be carpet fibers on old floor wax or a hundred different things. We don't know the microscope (other than it's not a professional lab microscope with a size indicator on the field). It seems to be shown at 15 power and 40 power -- but nothing higher and no oil preps or other things that would bring out more detail. The lack of commentary is interesting because the viewer can't directly critique it unless you spend some time with microscopes.

Whoever's on the microscope has little experience with it. They're moving the slide by hand and not using the stage controllers which would scroll the slide smoothly. I think they don't have a mount on the slide (cover slip) and the "It's ALIVE" slide is the small fibers moving in air currents. This is further confirmed by the dust mites slide... if the slide had been properly fixed (a cover slide put on it properly) the mite would be quite dead and not moving.

So the researcher doesn't know how to control the environment or the specimen. And they appear in some segments to be focusing the microscope by starting with the lens on a higher setting and moving the body tube down. This means they get an "F" for not paying attention to their lab instructor who told them a hundred times how to use a microscope. And they probably cracked a slide or two.

"A Mite Feeding in Infected Spider" well, we do have a mite and what might be a spider... and the threads look a bit fungal. Fungi and dust on a dead spider isn't very unusual and spiders do die from fungal infections. We don't know what kind of spider or where it's from (yes that would make a difference.)

"Morgellon's hair follicle"... oh dear. You know, I get stuff like that on my hairbrush when I brush it in the mornings. It's lint from the bed linen. Anyone with a brush will have that showing up... part sebum, part dead skin cells, and part lint and dust from the environment.

So I see bad technique passed off as drama, here. I'd like to see those same things with GOOD technique and proper slide prep.



Some interesting stuff on dust balls (research done by school kids, and it's very solid work):
www.nysgjerrigper.no...

Morgellon's Watch had an interesting discussion on the fibers
morgellonswatch.com...


(back later... more homework....)

I think they don't have a mount on the slide (cover slip) and the "It's ALIVE" slide is the small fibers moving in air currents. This is further confirmed by the dust mites slide... if the slide had been properly fixed (a cover slide put on it properly) the mite would be quite dead and not moving.

First, let me say Byrd - I prostrate myself before your wealth of knowledge. So don't take this as a sledge because I rate your knowledge and your input to this discussion and others very highly.

But your above statement is incredibly misleading. Here's why. You make two claims as to what you believe:

-They don't have a mount on the slide
-The movement is caused by air currents.

You then continue 'this is further confirmed'. Except only one of those points is confirmed by the fact that the mite is alive: the fact that they have are not using a cover slide. This does not confirm that the movement we see is caused by air currents.

I say this because that was my initial explanation as well. But as I watched the clip a few more times, I saw no movement whatsoever in any of the other fibres. Unless we are talking about some kind of micro air current, I don't see how it could move one fibre so drastically and not affect any of the others whatsoever.

I completely agree though that the presentation of this information is flawed at best. I'm not even that familiar with science, and my first reaction was that there is no point of reference for magnification amount whatsoever. The second thing lacking - that I noticed anyway - was any kind of explanation for what the drop of hydrogen peroxide actually means.

And I was hoping you could explain this a little further. Clearly it is meant to indicate something, and perhaps someone with more scientific knowledge would know what that something is - unfortunately, I do not. Given the incredible lack of information, perhaps you could explain what the person posting these videos is claiming we are seeing when the hydrogen peroxide is added. You may not agree, but if you could explain on their behalf I would greatly appreciate it.

I don't really have much input on the other discussions contained in the thread because they're quite scientific and frankly I don't understand them. But I'm trying!

On another point, this was posted on Rense today: www.cdc.gov...

The CDC has removed it's page detailing delusional parasitosis. I also noticed that there is absolutely no information about Morgellons at all on the CDC site. I have e-mailed politely asking them about this. I'm sure they get a lot of e-mails about Morgellons, but as I stated in my e-mail I'm simply after more information about the Morgellons task force they have assembled.

This task force allegedly first met in June 2006, which means that it has been in operation for almost 12 months. At the very least I would except one press release under the media section of the site, detailing the forming of this task force. I find the fact that there are zero results when searching the site for the word 'Morgellons', when the Center has a task force dedicated to this very phenomena, strange to say the least.

I don't really expect a reply, but if I get one I will post it here.

[edit on 12-4-2007 by TheStev]

Originally posted by TheStev-They don't have a mount on the slide
-The movement is caused by air currents.

Based on a few years of teaching and working with microscopes, yes.

I say this because that was my initial explanation as well. But as I watched the clip a few more times, I saw no movement whatsoever in any of the other fibres. Unless we are talking about some kind of micro air current, I don't see how it could move one fibre so drastically and not affect any of the others whatsoever.

Based on seeing similar things when I didn't put cover slips on the slide. It depends on the height and angle of the object... yes, even at a microscopic level. That's why we put cover slips on the slides -- to make sure that when we see movement it's really moving (bacteria will continue to move, as will amoeba and other things when a cover slip is set on the slide.)

I completely agree though that the presentation of this information is flawed at best. I'm not even that familiar with science, and my first reaction was that there is no point of reference for magnification amount whatsoever. The second thing lacking - that I noticed anyway - was any kind of explanation for what the drop of hydrogen peroxide actually means.

I didn't see that, but I agree... don't see any reason to add that.

Given the incredible lack of information, perhaps you could explain what the person posting these videos is claiming we are seeing when the hydrogen peroxide is added. You may not agree, but if you could explain on their behalf I would greatly appreciate it.

If you'll link that vid, I'll look at it. However, the first thing that occurred to me is that H2O2 bubbles in the presence of some proteins and destroys stuff. It's a mild disinfectant, but can't be used against a lot of things. I can't see any reason to use it in slide preps!
www.madsci.org...

On another point, this was posted on Rense today: www.cdc.gov...
The CDC has removed it's page detailing delusional parasitosis.

Interesting. I wonder if the Morgellon's people convinced the CDC that this is the wrong diagnosis to apply to them. I think we should watch and see what comes up in its place (and meanwhile I'll do some more snooping).

I also noticed that there is absolutely no information about Morgellons at all on the CDC site.

Because there's no definitive set of diagnoses. This has been one of the big problems here, as even the Foundation admits. There has to be a very clear set of guidelines before it can be identified as a disease.

This task force allegedly first met in June 2006, which means that it has been in operation for almost 12 months. At the very least I would except one press release under the media section of the site, detailing the forming of this task force. I find the fact that there are zero results when searching the site for the word 'Morgellons', when the Center has a task force dedicated to this very phenomena, strange to say the least.

That may not be as significant as you think... I see an announcement for a paper presentation on it as an emerging disease at a state government conference next month.
www.michigan.gov...

I don't know why the page is gone (it's interesting that it is) and I can't find out much about the task force, either (I'll continue to look.) I did some additional poking around. I did notice that the task force has been postponed six different times (according to one site) -- whether this has to do with the docs' schedules or something else is unknown.

Anyway, I'll continue looking over the next few weeks. I'm tempted to speculate, but there's not enough info here.

Very quickly....

Continuing a brief discussion of why this is unlikely to be nanotech:

As you should have noticed by now, cells are pretty much like high security factory areas. They don't let very many things in and they boot out almost everything that approaches them. Ions and small particles can enter but if something doesn't match their template for acceptable things then it will be refused entry. Viruses can take over cells because part of their structure is a complex chemical 'key' that imitates something the cell lets in. The keys vary (the various designations for the flu viruses indicate which key it's using to enter the cells.)

So...the key is fairly sizeable in nature. You'd have to have a nanomachine with a viruslike key... and that puts it of a size to get "noticed" by the cell. If it gets noticed, it gets walled off and expelled.

But let's say that it gets in... now you want it to do something. They can do simple things, but there's some real limitations.:
www.sciencedaily.com...

Frankly, it's easier to re-engineer a virus than it is to try to make one of those.

Could you bring one in to make nanotubes of carbon?

There's some huge issues there, including "how do you get the carbon atom away from a molecule and how do you get it to stick to another carbon atom without inserting things that poison the cells?" Carbon likes to hang with whatever it's hanging with and isn't eager to release the other "stuff." So you need a LOT of energy (from a compound or other source) to crack off a single carbon atom (it'd be an ion, actually, since it would be short a few electrons.) You have to keep it isolated (in spite of its lunging towards everything to grab electrons) and then force it together with another carbon atom...and build a ring and then a tube.

Huge amounts of energy. But... inside a cell you can't do it with ion beams and electron beams ( www.nsti.org...
) -- you'd have to use enzymes and recharge them (taking more energy.)

When you're done, the thing is only big enough to move a single electron at a time (this is mostly theoretical work. The abstract indicates they haven't actually done this yet) : www.nsti.org...

That's a lot of work for almost nothing. It'd be faster and easier to engineer a virus.

And that's a different can of worms.

My point was simply that proof of one does not extend to proof of the other. The moving mites proves that cover slides were not used, but this does not prove that the movement is caused by air currents - simply that the movement could have been caused by such. I know it wasn't your intention to be misleading, but proving that a cover slide was not used does not prove that air currents caused the movement we saw. Minor point though.

You mention the height and angle affects the movement, which is understandable. What I'm wondering is this: if an object is to be studied microscopically and has height and angle, wouldn't flattening it with a cover slide affect the observation? For example: if we assume, for the sake of argument, that the movement witnessed was indication of some kind of intelligence or programming. Is it not possible that a cover slide would weigh on the fibre and stop it from being able to make such movement?

I'm not saying this is the case: it may be, it may not. What I'm saying is it seems possible that a cover slide could conceivably interfere with objective observation if the item being examined had substantial height. Understandably a cover slide does limit certain external influence on the observation, but it seems it does add some too.

Here is the video where the hydrogen peroxide is added to the sample:

www.youtube.com...

There are 4 in the series, as is explained on the video description - the first two identify the sample, the second two show the hydrogen peroxide reaction. The video I have linked is the third (it's one of the ones originally posted by kozmo on the last page. What stands out is that the person who has posted the video claims this is 'Proof Positive Morgellons is an Infection':

The last two Videos show a SURPRISE IN ACTION!!! Watch as an eyedropper adds a drop of Hydrogen Peroxide to this sample, and instantaneously the "Infection is Revealed" before your very eyes.

Source as per above Youtube link.

Which it may well be, I just don't understand why this is proof positive of this claim. This guy sure does seem to have a penchant for quotation marks though!

In terms of the CDC site, I understand that there is no official diagnosis, let alone official recognition of this condition. I certainly wouldn't expect any such posting on the site. But considering a task force has been formed for this phenomena, has been operating for 12 months, and even has an official spokesman (Dan Rutz), I find it very strange that there is absolutely nothing on the site.

Add to the above the fact that there is a press release for pretty much any and every little thing the CDC does on the site, plus the fact that this task force has obviously been formed due to public pressure, you would think there would be at least a small amount of info advising the public that such a task force exists and is studying the phenomena at present - if for no other reason than to relieve some of the pressure from the public.

Out of curiosity, where did you read about the task force being delayed six times? I would be interested to read that info.

"We're going into this with an open mind," said Dan Rutz, spokesman for the CDC Morgellons task force that first met in June 2006.

Source

Maybe they're having trouble finding those open minds With that said, I have to say I really appreciate yours on this subject. It's good to have a scientific sounding board for this stuff instead of the pure speculation I'm usually only capable of

A few additional points. This seems very confusing and contradictory to me:

So...the key is fairly sizeable in nature. You'd have to have a nanomachine with a viruslike key... and that puts it of a size to get "noticed" by the cell. If it gets noticed, it gets walled off and expelled.

The problem I have is this: if the key makes something of a size to get "noticed" which means it is rejected by the cell, how does this work for viruses? If the key can go unnoticed in a virus, then why not in some kind of nanotech.

I also wonder - and this is very abstract - what your take is on the military technology at least twenty years ahead of civilian technology concept. It seems to be apt here, in that a lot of your reasons for Morgellons not being nanotech is that it is too difficult to get a nanomachine to achieve what Morgellons does.

The reason I mention this is it seems to me as though the nature of scientific breakthrough is that something is 'too difficult' to do, right up until we have a scientific breakthrough. Then it becomes achievable. It's going down the completely unverifiable, unprovable, pure speculation conspiracy angle, but is it not possible that military technology has had a breakthrough in the last 'twenty years', that has made these impossible things possible?

[edit on 13-4-2007 by TheStev]

Yes, you are correct with the assumption concerning arthritis and other bone related problems. There are other factors around this as well. eg. lyme disease


As far as the agent causing morgellons, other medical stats to watch are ALS, and in particular Alzheimer's. The next decade will show an explosion of the number of people afflicted by these and many other neuro degenerative diseases, both known and newly emerging.

The videos you guys are discussing are definetly made by an amature sufferer. I know him and the fibers he has shown are certainly related to morgellons.

However, more professional, scientific presentations can be found here.
www.silentsuperbug.com watch video #2 and scan to 11:00 minutes into it to see interaction with skin(host)

then visit silentsuperbug-micro.blogspot.com... to view these related video's

WATCH MICRO

* **** STRAIN CBL001/ CULTURE/ QUORUM SENSING/ SELF ASSEMBLY/ FILAMENT/ SHEET/ CRYSTAL


WATCH MACRO

* **** STRAIN CBL001/ SKIN INFECTION/ CICATRICIAL/ POST INFECTIOUS
* **** STRAIN CBL001/ ONYCHOLYSIS/ HYPERKERATOSIS LIKE
* **** STRAIN CBL001/ BIOFILM/ QUORUM SENSING/ DISSEMINATION IN SKIN
* **** STRAIN CBL001/ ENHANCED COLOR/ QUORUM SENSING/ BIO FILM
* **** STRAIN CBL001/ FILAMENT/ ARTIFACT/ SKIN
* **** STRAIN CBL001/ FILAMENT/ ARTIFACT/ INFESTED NASAL MUCILAGE
* **** STRAIN CBL001/ PARASITIC LIKE BEHAVIOR

First Heartless Man - You Don\'t Really Need A Heart or A Pulse
  Posted 7 days ago with 51 member flags

Mystery teen illness: Brokovich team barred from testing school grounds
  Posted 13 days ago with 47 member flags

Doctor Uses Coconut Oil to Reverse Husband\'s Alzheimer\'s Disease
  Posted 13 days ago with 28 member flags

A brief look at water fluoridation and the insanity of it
  Posted 10 days ago with 28 member flags

Brains of Addicts Are Inherently Abnormal
  Posted 7 days ago with 20 member flags

FDA say body is a drug and has the right to regulate it!
  Posted 10 days ago with 18 member flags

Common Food Items Could Contain 180 Times More Fluoride Than Tap Water!
  Posted 4 days ago with 17 member flags

MPD/DID and Quantum Psychiatry
  Posted 14 days ago with 12 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: