It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Mass sterilization campaign Exposed! This Includes You! Epigenotoxins! Legal Loophole!

page: 3
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in


posted on May, 5 2009 @ 12:20 AM
Yikes, although it does not surprise me. Something has always set very wrong with me about how there all these drugs out there for every other ailment. I have the occasional seizure due to inbalanced hormones and a low thyroid and I have been offered all sorts of anti seizure meds. I looked at some of those and there is no way in hell I'd put that sort of crap in my body. I'd rather deal with the seizures. At the moment all the more I ever take is excedrine.

posted on May, 5 2009 @ 12:23 AM
I'm really wondering what other solution is being offered? If you're against this, what other options do you see?

We're already 700 million over carrying capacity for this planet, so the solution is what? Allow everyone to exercise their so-called "right" to have as many children as they want so that others already born will die for a lack of food, clean water or health care?

You do realize that there are many church organizations who go into the poorest African countries, like Mozambique, to help infants survive. . . so they can simply die at age 5 when their mother finally passes away from AIDS. Oh yes, that is so much better.

No solution is no solution. It is CRUEL to bring children into a world where they will suffer and die later. Either we control the population, or nature will -- and it won't be pretty.

Really, what we do need, but which no one in the US will ever agree to, is for those who are unfit to reproduce to voluntarily opt for sterilization, paid for by the government. Yes, this includes the mentally ill, those incapable of supporting themselves, individuals with congential defects and so forth. Abortions should be free, birth control should be free and readily available to anyone of any age, and on a global basis.

But in a culture where we make people with 18 kids into celebrities, or woman having 14 kids through IVF, it isn't going to happen.

Having more children than your environment can support isn't some wonderful spiritual experience, it's irresponsible and suicide for the species.

And if you don't support voluntary population control measures like birth control and abortions, guess what you're going to get?

Involuntary ones.

I hope you're pushing for the colonization of Mars, because that's the only other option we've got.

[edit on 5-5-2009 by VelmaLu]

posted on May, 5 2009 @ 01:06 AM
reply to post by andy1033

Its very important to know what crude birth rate and net birth rate is. "The birth rate is an item of concern and policy for a number of national governments. Some, including those of Italy and Malaysia, seek to increase the national birth rate using measures such as financial incentives or provision of support services to new mothers."


Look at the aging population of Europe for example. Deopulation can be a natural thing, doesnt have to include a NWO agenda or eugenics.

posted on May, 5 2009 @ 01:30 AM
reply to post by andy1033

If only I could give you more stars.

You expressed how I feel about controlling the population. People are irresponsible with their out of control breeding. And abortion? I am all for it, yes. People should have that choice. But the choice often comes at the price of all tax payers. Sad, but true.

Still, wouldn't it be better if pregnancy could happen only intentionally? And at a cost, so that it isn't abused?

I hate the idea of depopulation being needed. I sure don't wanna be caught in the middle of it myself, and see everyone I love face it as well.

It would be the only ETHICAL means of depopulation.

I reiterate. Every pregnancy could be intentional this way. It would make "pro-lifers" happy too, with no need for abortion they'd have to find something else to fight. n

I will add also, that I AM fixed. By choice, as I think others should consider. Essure is a very easy, and cheap alternative to "tubes tied" procedures. Awesome post again, Andy.

posted on May, 5 2009 @ 01:36 AM
I hope this ties in somehow.

Notice how the antivaccination debates have suddenly spurred up again?
The media seems to be strongly opposing the antivax crowd at the moment too.

It would be a good topic to raise and get people to change their minds over, at this point of time, considering what the vaccinations they will probably be soon pushing for.

[edit on 5-5-2009 by T0by]

posted on May, 5 2009 @ 02:57 AM
According to the UN populations will level off at 9 billion by the year 2300 if the Earth lowers its fertility rate from 2.7 to 2. That gives us tens if not hundreds of years to begin raising the level of affluence and thus lowering fertility rate of the world, much like it is currently in western nations.

Why not work on the real systemic sources of global poverty, ie the hording of wealth by the international elite, instead of embraking on mass Eugenics programs that have proved disasterious and immoral in the past?

Why not raise us all up instead of beating us all down?

posted on May, 5 2009 @ 03:30 AM
Thanks T0by. I have no doubt in my mind that our sterilization could easily come in a vaccine form. It worked on mice in the following example and says it's a cross species antigen so it would work in humans, yes.

Inhibition of sperm-egg binding and fertilisation in mice by a monoclonal antibody reactive to 57-kDa human sperm surface antigen.
Reddy KV, Vijayalaxmi G, Rajeev KS, Aranha C.
Immunology Division, National Institute for Research in Reproductive Health, J.M. Street, Parel, Mumbai, India.

Given the amply demonstrated predilection towards nationally sterilizing the populace, do you TRUST that a mandated vaccine will only affect what they say it will? Or do you think this pandemic hype is just one more way your CHOICE is removed?

A vaccine involves antigens and an immune reaction.. In desperation, you *might* be able to alter your cytokine profile by taking one of several supplements to suppress the immune reaction (or lack of reaction) until the vaccine dissipated..

Vaccine Failure

A vaccine failure is when an organism develops a disease in spite of being vaccinated against it. Primary vaccine failure occurs when an organism's immune system does not produce enough antibodies when first vaccinated. Secondary vaccine failure occurs when enough antibodies are produced immediately after the vaccination, but the levels fall over time. While antibody levels always fall over time, this would be a more rapid loss of immunity than expected for that vaccine.

And perhaps boost your NK cells during the times you're exposed to flu....
(edit: removed wanton product endorsements...reason: the warnings would take up too much space)

I honestly have no idea what's going to be in those one or two shots they may want to give out for swine flu. I heard "one or two simple vaccines in the next six months".

Let's not forget that vaccines really are getting better though, okay?

No-drug therapy boosts immune reaction to HIV

But here's an example of scientists using the term "political epidemiology": or politics (democracy) framed as a just a obstacle to scientists who have goals to meet.

Glob Public Health. 2009 Apr 14:1-14.

Mass immunisation, most intensively in the case of eradication, depends on a combination of reliable demand (e.g. public willingness to comply with the vaccine protocol) and effective supply (e.g. robust, generally state-led, vaccine delivery). This balance of compliance and enforceability is, quintessentially, socio-political in nature - conditioned by popular perceptions of disease and risk, wider conditions of economic development and poverty, technical aspects of vaccine delivery, and the prevailing international norms regarding power relations between states and peoples.

Power relations between states and peoples.

To all you pro-depakote, pro-fluoride, pro-bisphenol A folks: At least My Trust has to be Earned....It cannot be taken by force...and is therefore rarer and of higher value.

"Power without perception is virtually useless and therefore of no true value. You perceive nothing."

[edit on 5-5-2009 by elusive1]

posted on May, 5 2009 @ 07:51 AM
Woah, this is amazing.

I am a believer that medicine is not only good, but seriously bad. I mean if you look back in the old times our genepools must have been a little better. Gene mutations would not last and would not reproduce and so those defective genes were not carried on generation to generation.

However, medicine has allowed mutations to increase. Maybe this is a way to stop those mutations and ailments from reproducing bad genes if you follow my ramblings ....

posted on May, 5 2009 @ 08:09 AM
reply to post by LostNemesis

I agree with intentional pregnancy, but what ratio of babies born are accidents to being planned. Maybe this is why they do not do it, as the birth rate may drop too much.

But i agree people should need a licence for it, like driving a car or something.

posted on May, 5 2009 @ 08:21 AM
Sadly Mr. Gaz, HDAC inhibitors effects on sperm are clear. Broad DNA methylation erasures cause the inevitable demethylation of oncogenes which inhibit fertility in an embryo...even if a child is conceived..there is a higher likelihood of epigenetic abnormalities, especially hypomethylation of oncogenes leading to increased likelihood of cancer.

HDAC inhibitors in mitotic (not meiotic as in your gonads) tissue seem to cause undifferentiation so a return to a stem cell state. And this has uses... But as I said above they have NO business approving a GLOBAL HDAC inhibitor...It could be given in a depot in the order to spare the gonads from harm. To date there is no such depot. In addition demethylation of estrogen-sensitive tissue occurs from the EDC (endocrine disrupting chemical) bisphenol A found in abundance in canned goods and laminated aluminum soda cans...

posted on May, 5 2009 @ 08:51 AM
Remember the good old days of Eugenics, when the USA used to routinely sterilize undesirables, I heard it was so popular it was copied by the Nazis, and carried on until the 1970s, at least in mental institutions.

Didn't work then, won't work now, it's not really how genetics works. Enjoy your inbreeding.

posted on May, 5 2009 @ 09:18 AM

Originally posted by dizziedame

When Joe the drug abuser and alcoholic with a low IQ and mental problems has sex with Mary, the whore with HIV and low IQ and they produce an offspring it should be a crime against nature.

Thats your opinion not a fact.

Or how about when the manic depressive male that frequently talks of sucide and the crack whore make a baby. Shame , shame, shame.

So just because he is manic/depressive, and the mom is a crack whore. Means that the baby itself will fall into those 'subroutines' -looks in the mirror- I am niether nor. My dad offed himself 3 years ago. My mom ran out on me. So from what you are saying is that I am a shame. Your thinking is flawed. I'm alive and well. I saw how they were living and I felt the abuse. I like so many before me vowed "It stops here".

Why should people that don't give a damn about their lives be allowed to bring an innocent child into the world.

They should be allowed because, it is a normal part of nature. Given me being brought up in the household i was. Im fine. Happy, Healthy, Hell im even engaged.

In my opinion some people should not ever have children. When my mother said this to me many years ago I called her Hitler. Now, I see and understand why she said what she did.
Well well. History repeats itself eh, Adolph

Being a parent is the most important job you will ever have. If more people realized that fact we would not have parents killing, molesting and doing other horrible things to children.

Meh I agree and disagree with this one. Please explain how knowledge would cut down on crimes against children.

Babies cannot chose the circumstances they are born into. But we can.

They might not be able to, but they can certainly take the right steps when they're older to avoid becoming like those they call parents.

Life is not all fluff and a bowl of cherries. It's time we became responsible people and not have unwanted and uncared for babies with no chance in hell of having a decent chance at life.

How many people do you know are from broken homes. I know for a fact most of us do have happy productive lives. Check your sources. Then come back, because i call bull#.

As far as couples that cannot conceive they could adopt a homeless baby and give it a chance. To adopt a child is to give the gift of a love and a chance to have a good life.

Where do the sterile couples come in. If you are sterilized against your own will, thats a crime against humanity. If its genetic then fine. Adopt, but believe you me, even couples who can birth children can adopt. So dont forget to ream them about that.

Love, Peace, Chicken Grease, and dont forget Nikabrick

Blessed Be and Merry Part


[edit on 5/5/2009 by SemperParatusRJCC]

[edit on 5/5/2009 by SemperParatusRJCC]

posted on May, 5 2009 @ 09:45 AM
Congratulatoins elusive1 on being maybe the first to break this conspiracy.

I just googled Epigenotoxins and the first 4 pages were mainly from ATS and your thread!!

Very interesting and star and flag for you.....

I did happen to find a 24 page PDF book that also mentions a lot of what you are talking about here........interesting read....

posted on May, 5 2009 @ 11:22 AM
reply to post by Neo_Serf

If the planet cannot support 6 billion, then why do you think leveling off at 9 billion is a solution?

posted on May, 5 2009 @ 11:25 AM
reply to post by andy1033

True, most babies born probably ARE accidents... I am just so horrified by the fact that people can CREATE PEOPLE, on ACCIDENT.

There are checks and balances in nature, to keep animals from over-breeding. From predators, to lack of food, and DISEASE - nature keeps animal populations in check.

At some point we started 'playing God' to prevent nature from keeping us in check. It only makes sense to me that we've reached a point of needing to decide to do it ourselves.... or wait until nature fights back and takes us all out, anyway.

[These are RULES of NATURE. Congrats to the people that have decided we have no connection to animals. But as long as we live on this planet, we are very much still subject to the rules of nature. Hope this makes sense. If the current flu was not created in a lab, then this is what is going on right now, as we type!]

[edit on 5-5-2009 by LostNemesis]

posted on May, 5 2009 @ 11:44 AM
Nature aborts up to one-half of all human pregnancies anyway. It will terminate a baby if the environment cannot support the child. That means that a spontaneous abortion will occur if the mother does not have enough food to eat, is too stressed, too old, too young or the embryo is defective.

What we have done is thwart nature without putting in to practice measures to limit population growth. In primitive cultures, someone with a severe physical defect would likely not survive, and therefore, have little chance to reproduce.

As as species, we've elevated reproduction into a sacred act, tied it up into religion and morality and, as a result, we are unable to make rational decisions regarding how we exist given finite resources. We don't see that bringing in more people will result in those that are here having less. We will ignore it until those that are starving are white and living in a first world nation.

The whole debate about abortion is a fine example, showing that you have one special interest group pushing for the birth of every pregnancy regardless of whether the child is wanted, can be cared for, or the circumstances of the parents. It's fetus worship at its best and the attitude is going to be the demise of this planet. There is no magical sky being who is going to save us regardless of how many people whisper it's name.

Because this is such a hot topic, there will be no discussion with the government because we're incapable as a society of separating fact from religious myth. They will be forced to resort to underhanded techniques like mass sterilization of teenage women, or tainted medications, etc.

We will have no say in who gets to breed because some people believe it is a sacred right, that the unborn have infinitely more rights than living, breathing human beings, that human life is something to be more revered before it passes through the birth canal.

posted on May, 5 2009 @ 11:46 AM
Tell me who the world leaders are that have decided not to have any children and I'll gladly listen to their views on the planets over population problems.

posted on May, 5 2009 @ 11:56 AM
You're not going to get to have a discussion with anyone. It's no longer an issue of deciding whether we need to curb population or not; it is HOW we're going to go about it.

Your choices are:

1. Mass die-off (most expedient)

2. Secret involuntary sterilization (most likely, least amount of opposition)

3. Voluntary population reduction

People seem to think this issue is up for debate. It isn't. We're waaaaay over capacity on the planet already, we need 1/3 of the population to die right now. But so many people are hopelessly trapped in superstition that they will never adopt voluntary methods for reducing the number of human beings. Most religious folks are actively supporting programs which INCREASE the number of people on the planet and are in complete denial of the realities of the situation. Those that do understand it believe that if we continue on this path, God will intervene and make more resources, or carry off His faithful servants to heaven, or only kill the heathens.

It's not some vague concept that maybe we need to stop having babies. It's that we're out of resources, water, food, oil, arable land. The fact that someone is trying to do something about this is at least responsible.

Of course, if you have some viable alternative to solving this problem, I'm ready to hear it. But given the current religious climate in the world, I'm all for sterilization.

posted on May, 5 2009 @ 01:13 PM
reply to post by Aeons

Thank you so much for mentioning this - it's true: when women have control over if and when they have babies and how many, they choose to have less.

I wonder if many of the posters in this thread realize it was common practice in the US and other countries - even as recently as the 70's - to secretly sterilize women. Young women would go in for "routine" check-ups, be told they needed some procedure or other - and actually they'd be sterilized.

BBC radio did an eye opening documentary about it two/three years ago, and you can Google Forced Sterilizations +Native Americans if you want more information.

posted on May, 5 2009 @ 01:43 PM
Again, I ask the question, what solution do you propose to overpopulation?

top topics

<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in