9 out of 10 Obese Patients Die from Swine flu

reply to post by Sunset Spawn


Furthermore I spent time in the hospital nursing and holding the feverish hand of my Grandpa while he lay suffering from Pneumonia and swine flu last spring, I did not get it.

I saw HS in the hospital, I saw patients being administered masks, I was in the thick of a MidWest outbreak, and stayed safe.

And amazing, I am fat...

[edit on 27-9-2009 by antar]

Do you have a source link or this article? How limited was the test?

ATS is part of the reason I'm fat, sitting in front of the computer doesn't burn many calories.

I think the bottom line is that the flu beats on your body so bad that you end up succumbing to "prior medical conditions" regardless of what that condition may be.

My friend almost died from the flu and he was in great shape but he's diabetic.

The thyroid controls both the immune system and the metabolism. Read "The Thyroid Diet "by Mary Shomon and "Thyroid Power" by Richard Shames M.D. and Karilee H. Shames Ph.D.. You can also go to their websights.

[edit on 27-9-2009 by eradown]

I have read on how the swine flu attacks the lungs and respiratory system, that is what is killing people.

Taking into consideration that many people that are over weight develop problems with their respiratory system, (my brother one of them) that is why numbers will be higher for those no only overweight but also anybody that have weak immune system.

So just because people are over eight doesn't mean the flu is going to kill them all.

Is many people that are in very good health that are overweight by Americas health standards.

So I have mix feelings about this one.

reply to post by marg6043


OK now this is where the information gets muddled, I have read on many occassions where this virus/vaccine works on otherwise healthy immune systems, so in essence the stronger the immune sytem the higher the likelyhood of it turning against the victim.

This has probably freaked me out and left me more than anything.

As for the people with preexisting lung problems, we just dont know what this is going to do or not do, perhaps having a preexisting perpensitiy towards a buildup of mucous in the lungs will be a saving grace as the mutation is not interested in these types of people.

Originally posted by antar
reply to post by kj6754

 

FACE THE FACTS:
WE have been fattened up for the slaughter! GMOs are geared toward creating the fat people we are today!

This is my feeling on that precisely. Tearing down our immune systems when TPTB have the knowledge to prevent it is just plain hateful, bias, judgmental, greedy, and selfish on their part. I'm still surprised any time that anyone has a question about what the motives are behind this "pandemic". Thanks for your statement and you are surely not alone on that one.

FACE THE FACTS:
WE have been fattened up for the slaughter! GMOs are geared toward creating the fat people we are today!

Scientists are describing the risk of mutation of the swine flu as where the danger is. My understanding of GMO's is that they increase bacteria attempts at gene transfer(mutation). If you eat GMO's boil them first this should degrade the dna and stop this mutation risk.

reply to post by antar


No, the swine flu that is now in the population of the US is the same strain that was on the last breake in the 70s, big pharma and the government has been very good at scaring people about the first breake back in the 1918, when the swine flu attacked more of the healthy younger generation, but what the government doesn't say is that at that time America and Americans were not as over vaccinated and over medicated as they are right now and neither health care was accesible as is now .

So, just like the regular seasonal flu the swine flu of the 2008 is just the same, people that otherwise will die from regular flu due to illness and complications will also succumb without promptly medical attention under swine flu.

So, so far swine flu is not the swine flu of 1918 and probably will never become as dangerous even if it mutates.

Remember people if you are with weak immune system or happen to have weak lungs or problems with your respiratory system, you are to do what you do to prevent and ease the complications when face with common cold, seasonal flu or any other ailments that can exacerbate your symptoms, do not wait until is too late.

Many of the deaths can be preventable so don't wait.



[edit on 27-9-2009 by marg6043]

Sure do whatever it is you do to get healthy, and beat the flu. I am not an advocaye of vaccines and I suggest the scholary attempt at mutation risk is appropriate. Other things that increase mutations are, heat shock (flu suffers keep yourself warm) heavy metals, antibiotics (increase mutation up to 10000 times) Again the swine flu as it is now is not so bad, the risk is in what it could become. Health authorities are better employed stopping mutation's than creating vaccines.

This makes so much sense now!

Obama is into eugenics. Think about it. He wants to KILL the fat people, seriously. I was saying this a year ago when Planned Parenthood was on his metaphoric testicles. It all makes sense now.

Make America fat & unhealthy, then kill all the fat people. It's genius!

Make America poor, then make abortions easy & free!

Make the old people "a problem", then legalize euthanasia!

There are many examples like this.

Originally posted by SoLittleTimeToRead
People who suffer from any disease on the autistic spectrum, or from celiac disease, or from any immune deficiency at all, including diabetes, multiple sclerosis, cancer, etc. would be more prone to catch this flu just like any other. Even the high usage of antibiotics over a period of time will break down the body's defenses requiring the use of more antibiotics to stave off disease.

Some good sites to look at are the body ecology diet, specific carb diet, gluten free casein free diet, and any discussion boards or blogs about immune system disorders.

Can you elaborate? My son is high functioning autistic and I have him on a gluten free diet -- which makes a HUGE difference.

As for obesity - great, I'm a goner! My family genetically leans towards tall, broad, husky (ok a bit fat) farm people.

There has been a lot of research that shows that a large number of the obese population may have been infected by a virus, accounting for the huge uptick (no pun intended) of obesity. A significant portion of obese folks with no family history show similar antibodies to some sort of virus.

For what it's worth contrary to popular belief we have excellent medical care in Mexico. The Dr's here have people literally running to the gyms. Word is circulating from the medical community that the flu could kill you if you're fat, that the people who died first round were fat.

It's funny because we don't have the obesity problems here that they have in the states, not to say we don't have fat people, but not nearly as many or as big, but people are being told to get in shape so people who are five pounds overweight are terrified they're going to die lol.

At least here the people are being warned.

Sucks for the fattys maybe they shoulda thought about eating healthy? If your scared of swine flu its because you don't eat right, people who eat enough organic fruits, vegetables, seeds and nuts have nothing to worry about. Hopefully the swine flu kills everyone who eats mcdonalds, one can only dream.....

Originally posted by Mountainmeg
Can you elaborate? My son is high functioning autistic and I have him on a gluten free diet -- which makes a HUGE difference.

My daughter is also high functioning autistic, aka Asperger's Syndrome, mostly and mainly because she is verbal, but still having some bowel trouble and some of the stimming behaviors. Gluten free helps tremendously, but also casein free will help also. I first really noticed her sensitivity to gluten when she was playing with my 6yo and the 6yo put a sticker from a coloring book on her chest. Well, when it was removed about 30 mins afterwards, she had a bright red rash on her skin from the gluten in the glue on the sticker. With dairy products, she can't seem to get enough of them. She can eat them all day long and still crave them, but also be hanging off the arm of the couch or the edge of the table. Now I know that's from her stomach hurting, and that's the only way she can make it feel better. The sensitivities to these proteins are also an inability to process them properly, so she is not getting the nutritions from those foods at all.

gfcf-diet.talkaboutcuringautism.org...

Most people do have antigens that are constantly fighting off some kind of virus all of the time. I learned about this in the Body Ecology Diet, but the principle is the same with the other diets. Most people are suffering from a yeast overgrowth in the intestines which is allowing viruses and infections to settle there indefinitely even if they do not show outward symptoms letting the person know there is something wrong. When one gets the symptoms of a flu bug or something else, that disease is the most prevalent virus that is not being knocked out by the immune system. With autistic children, they also have the heavy metals in the brain that are just sitting there doing damage, while the immune system is fighting off either viruses, like measles often times, in the intestines. The gluten and the casein also cannot be filtered through properly, and the immune system attacks the issues in the intestine first along with parts of the intestine itself and the toxins in the brain are left there to keep the brain from developing and functioning normally.

Ok, with the yeast overgrowth, most people do not eat proper foods that are easy on their guts, leaving yeast in the gut even after it has been digested. Yeast is a great breeding ground for viruses and infections to get in and overload the system. Antibiotics are the most common drug to treat the infections, but as soon as those are used up, most people go right back to the poor diets allowing the yeast and the harmful bacteria to flourish in the gut again. It's certainly a circle. Setting people up for round after round of sickness followed by antibiotics followed by poor diet. The major food chains are certainly doing their part in triggering and harbouring this cycle of poor diet, poor health, and our unwavering dependence on the health system to keep us feeling just good enough to continue going to work, paying our bills, and surviving until the next round of sickness. Call me crazy, but they have been working on this for years, getting the system and the people in this position.

You can find out more about the body ecology diet and donna gates here:
www.autismmedia.org...
and here:
bodyecology.com...

Hope this helps.

reply to post by antar

FACE THE FACTS: WE have been fattened up for the slaughter! GMOs are geared toward creating the fat people we are today!

Boy do you have that correct. And it was done on purpose thanks to the Committee for Economic Development (CED) sister organization of the Council on Foreign Relations(CRF)

The obesity problem is because we no longer eat REAL FOOD
Think about it. Up until the sixties, Mom cooked, microzotting something for dinner was impossible and cost prohibited. Up until recently the human diet was Meat and Veggies with a few berries or fruit thrown in occassionally as a treat. Now we have Milk and Meat stuffed with growth hormones. US corn and Soy are all GMO not to mention all the SALT put into everything to make you drink more SODA. Remember the salted peanuts in bars are not a free lunch but there to get you to drink.

I just talked to a Lady at a Farmers Market. She said That the European Union bans import of American food. So yes we are being fattened up and it is going to get much worse.

"Vested interest groups have orchestrated a legislative lullaby to hush the public's growing unease with the safety of its food supply. Their enablers in the mainstream corporate controlled media amplify a chorus of government officials and non-governmental organizations admonishing that the public must be confident that the food it buys is safe. But having confidence our food is safe is not the same as having food that is safe and wholesome to eat." Source

The same agricultural policies that made farmers into commodity crop growers are at the root of the current obesity epidemic. According to a report by the Institute for Agricultural and Trade Policy called “Food Without Thought: How US Farm Policy Contributes to Obesity,” “the problem with the extensive use of cheap commodities in food products is that they fall into the very dietary categories that have been linked to obesity: added sugars and fats. US Farm policies driving down the price of these commodities made added sugars and fats some of the cheapest food substances to produce. High fructose corn syrup and hydrogenated vegetable oils – products that did not even exist a few generations ago but are now hard to avoid – have proliferated thanks to artificially cheap corn and soybeans.”[13] In other words, US farm policies make poor eating habits an economically sensible choice – with long-term negative health consequences for consumers and economically devastating consequences for family farmers.


....the localization movement, though still in its early stages of development, hasn't gone unnoticed by agribusiness, which recognizes that the movement directly competes with the highly consolidated retail chains for the consumer dollar.





The American public has a great and unmet need to understand the true impacts (that is, the predictable consequences) of the Food Safety Enhancement Act of 2009, before the Senates passes its version of this dangerous bill. The US Congress has a long, tragic history of passing legislation that promotes the industrialization of our food supply, effectively implementing the wishes -- both stated and unstated -- of agribusiness, and it's about to do it again.

Using the pretext of food safety, those behind the Food Safety Enhancement Act seek to institute changes the American public would not condone if it understood what is at stake. The country is being duped into believing that the pseudo-scientific measures prescribed by the bill will prevent new outbreaks of food-borne illnesses when in reality FSEA will usher in a number of undesirable outcomes, none of which do a thing to improve food safety. On the contrary, these measures will permit large processors to become an essentially unregulated segment of the industry by privatizing the inspection process, and -- at the same time -- the new regulations will constitute a cost-prohibitive barrier for small players to remain in business, making them easy targets for indiscriminant enforcement and greater market consolidation.

These proposed measures seek to apply “HACCP” (pronounced ‘hassip') -- a food protection approach originally designed to assure the safety of processed foods -- to raw foods, a kind of mistake only a lawyer or lobbyist would see a reason to make. The food safety wrecking crew responsible for applying HACCP erroneously to “raw-in/raw-out” meat and poultry operations in the 90s is back and ready to apply it erroneously to the produce market, the next FDA target in its quest for expanded oversight authority and police powers.

FSEA's success would have severe consequences for the nationwide food localization movement. Though millions want to see the development of local food systems that provide an environmentally sound and health-sustaining alterative to the industrially manufactured products ruining our collective health, their dreams will be stamped out before they're allowed to grow their infrastructure and reach due to the FDA's expensive, unnecessary regulations.

If the Senate passes its version of HR 2749, we will also see our food laws brought significantly closer to harmonization with Codex Alimentarius, the cartel-acceptable food codes that the World Trade Organization employs to dictate to all member nations the terms of the global food trade for the benefit of transnational corporations.

With World War II, America saw its agricultural system intentionally subjected to political policies that radically transformed it. What was once a decentralized system that provided a means to self sufficiency and independence for tens of millions of farmers was purposefully centralized into a capital-intensive fossil-fuel dependent system that restructured local economies, permitting their wealth to be extracted by what are now transnational cartels dedicated to the so-called free market and globalized trade at all costs....

This transformation [in Agriculture] was the result of organized plans developed by a group of highly powerful – though unelected – financial and industrial executives who wanted to drastically change agricultural practices in the US to better serve their collective corporate financial agenda. This group, called the Committee for Economic Development, was officially established in 1942 as a sister organization to the Council on Foreign Relations. CED has influenced US domestic policies in much the same way that the CFR has influenced the nation's foreign policies.[1]

Composed of chief executive officers and chairmen from the federal reserve, the banking industry, private equity firms, insurance companies, railroads, information technology firms, publishing companies, pharmaceutical companies, the oil and automotive industries, meat packing companies, retailers – CED determined that the problem with American agriculture was that there were too many farmers. But the CED had a “solution”: millions of farmers would just have to be eliminated.

In a number of reports written over a few decades, CED recommended that farming “resources” – that is, farmers – be reduced. In its 1945 report “Agriculture in an Expanding Economy,” CED complained that “the excess of human resources engaged in agriculture is probably the most important single factor in the ‘farm problem'” and describes how agricultural production can be better organized to fit to business needs.[2] A report published in 1962 entitled “An Adaptive Program for Agriculture”[3] is even more blunt in its objectives, leading Time Magazine to remark that CED had a plan for fixing the identified problem: “The essential fact to be faced, argues CED, is that with present high levels farm productivity, more labor is involved in agriculture production that the market demands – in short, there are too may farmers. To solve that problem, CED offers a program with three main prongs.” Source

Control the Food Control The People - Kissinger

Grow your own food, problem solved.

reply to post by Rawhemp

Grow your own food, problem solved.

No it does not solve the problem.

One of the "Food Safety Con job" Bills includes this:

"in any action to enforce the requirements of the food safety law, the connection with interstate commerce required for jurisdiction SHALL BE PRESUMED TO EXIST."

The fact you are growing veggies for you and friends does not exclude you from the law or fines.

“..FOOD PRODUCTION FACILITY- The term 'food production facility' means any farm, ranch, orchard, vineyard, aquaculture facility, or confined animal-feeding operation...”
There is NO exemption for instate commerce, for hobby farms, for you backyard garden.

“ The Administrator, in order to protect the public health, shall establish a national traceability system that enables the Administrator to retrieve the history, use, and location of an article of food through all stages of its production, processing, and distribution.

1. set good practice standards to protect the public and animal health and promote food safety;
   
2. conduct monitoring and surveillance of animals, plants, products, or the environment, as appropriate
   
3. require each food production facility to have a written food safety plan that describes the likely hazards and preventive controls implemented to address those hazards;
   
4. include, with respect to growing, harvesting, sorting, and storage operations, minimum standards related to fertilizer use, nutrients, hygiene, packaging, temperature controls, animal encroachment, and water”
   

Notice it does not say a person SELLING food, it says a person holds, stores, or transports food or food ingredients.



HOW IS IT ENFORCED?

A food production facility shall permit the Administrator upon presentation of appropriate credentials and at reasonable times and in a reasonable manner, to have access to and ability to copy all records maintained by or on behalf of such food production establishment in any format (including paper or electronic) and at any location, that are necessary to assist the Administrator

Civil Penalty
(A) IN GENERAL- Any person that commits an act that violates the food safety law (including a regulation promulgated or order issued under the food safety law) may be assessed a civil penalty by the Administrator of not more than $1,000,000 for each such
B) SEPARATE OFFENSE- Each act described in subparagraph (A) and each day during which that act continues shall be considered a separate offense.

There is no "judicial review" meaning there is no recourse to a jury trial. The administrator (Mike Taylor lawyer for Monsanto) is the final judge not the US court system.


This is the kicker that allows the USDA/FDA to regulate home gardens and home food storage

The Commerce Clause:

A farmer growing wheat for his own use “The government claimed that if Mr. Filburn grew wheat for his own use, he would not be buying it — and that affected interstate commerce” The Supreme court found against the farmer!!!
www.fff.org...
Enter Roscoe Filburn, an Ohio dairy and poultry farmer, who raised a small quantity of winter wheat — some to sell, some to feed his livestock, and some to consume. In 1940, under authority of the Agricultural Adjustment Act, the central government told Mr. Filburn that for the next year he would be limited to planting 11 acres of wheat and harvesting 20 bushels per acre. He harvested 12 acres over his allotment for consumption on his own property. When the government fined him, Mr. Filburn refused to pay.
Wickard v. Filburn got to the Supreme Court, and in 1942, the justices unanimously ruled against the farmer. The government claimed that if Mr. Filburn grew wheat for his own use, he would not be buying it — and that affected interstate commerce. It also argued that if the price of wheat rose, which is what the government wanted, Mr. Filburn might be tempted to sell his surplus wheat in the interstate market, thwarting the government's objective. The Supreme Court bought it


The Court's opinion must be quoted to be believed:
[The wheat] supplies a need of the man who grew it which would otherwise be reflected by purchases in the open market. Home-grown wheat in this sense competes with wheat in commerce.
As Epstein commented, "Could anyone say with a straight face that the consumption of home-grown wheat is 'commerce among the several states?'" For good measure, the Court justified the obvious sacrifice of Mr. Filburn's freedom and interests to the unnamed farmers being protected:
It is of the essence of regulation that it lays a restraining hand on the self-interest of the regulated and that advantages from the regulation commonly fall to others.
After Wickard , everything is mere detail. The entire edifice of civil rights legislation stands on the commerce power. Under this maximum commerce power, the government has been free to regulate nearly everything, including a restaurant owner's bigotry. The Court has held that if Congress sees a connection to interstate commerce, it is not its role to second guess.

Control the food control the people - Kissenger

ok, so here is my question: how could they accurately get a study going when this swine flu hasnt been over a year old. Here in Idaho we dont have many swine flu cases, with absolutely no one dying from it. so on a scarier note, is there some prison that they are harboring humans as gunea pigs, then finding that only obese people are dying. wow first i thought if any thing was scienetific it had to be studied, then restudied, guess not this day and age. nope your fat your dead. so get skinny or we will give you this little blue pill, if you dont want the pill we will fine you and seize your property. wow things are out of hand!

reply to post by crimvelvet


Explain to me how they find me? What are they gonna do come to every house and check for gardens? I seriously doubt it, even if it does get to that point i wouldn't stick around for them to come a knockin

reply to post by Rawhemp


According to one of the people on the farming blogs, her daughter is one of many students using photo survelliance to check up on farms. They are also using subscriptions to magazines, purchases and vet records and plan to recruit spies. Have a neighbor that doesn't like you?....

Dr. John Wiemers is quoted as having said that they would travel every back road to find all our animals:

I even attended, at my own expense, NIAA’s ID Expo in 2006 to learn firsthand about the program. It was there that Dr. John Weimers told me personally that he would drive every back road to find every backyard flock and tag each chicken. NoNAIS

Spies Like Us

People have been wondering how the USDA is ever going to enforce such a complex Byzantine system of regulations as their National Animal Identification System (NAIS) that proposes to ID and track every single food animal in America. Well now we know:

US planning to recruit one in 24 Americans as citizen spies

The Bush Administration aims to recruit millions of United States citizens as domestic informants in a program likely to alarm civil liberties groups. The program would use a minimum of 4 per cent of Americans to report “suspicious activity”. Civil liberties groups have already warned that, with the passage earlier this year of the Patriot Act, there is potential for abusive, large-scale investigations of US citizens. Highlighting the scope of the surveillance network, TIPS volunteers are being recruited primarily from among those whose work provides access to homes, businesses or transport systems. Letter carriers, utility employees, truck drivers and train conductors are among those named as targeted recruits.

Historically, informant systems have been the tools of non-democratic states. According to a 1992 report by Harvard University’s Project on Justice, the accuracy of informant reports is problematic, with some informants having embellished the truth, and others suspected of having fabricated their reports.