Was the Polio disease a result of DDT production?

Science !!😃

a reply to: Nathan-D

My belief is that they claimed the paralysis came from Polio when in reality it was an effect of the DDT.

They covered their tracks with the "success" of the polio vaccine, which just so happened to spread a trans-generational cancer causing disease (the 40th created while developing the vaccine) called Simian Virus 40 or SV40.

Rockefeller Medicine is rooted in pure evil.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Nathan-D

Polio was supposedly an unintended consequence of better sanitation from a virus found in poop.

Supposedly when most people lived hand to mouth, people where exposed to the virus as babies when it’s least dangerous to a person.

Better sanitation pushed off the exposure to ages where paralysis had a better chance to develop.

So now they just inject the poop right into them.

“Africa Declares Wild Polio Is Wiped Out — Yet It Persists In Vaccine-Derived Cases”

www.npr.org...

“Polio outbreaks in Africa caused by mutation of strain in vaccine“

www.theguardian.com...

originally posted by: butcherguy
The polio vaccine may have had a bit of an effect on polio cases, don't you think? It began being used in 1955 and by 1979, the US was polio free.

Correlation is not causation. SARS was easily eradicated without vaccine. Every year people take flu vaccine and flu keeps getting more and more.

Interesting read... different perspective.

How Rachel Carson Cost Millions of People Their Lives

Summary: Rachel Carson was the person to warn about DDT and was instrumental in getting it banned. The problem was:

Although DDT soon became synonymous with poison, the pesticide was an effective weapon in the fight against an infection that has killed—and continues to kill—more people than any other: malaria. By 1960, due largely to DDT, malaria had been eliminated from eleven countries, including the United States. As malaria rates went down, life expectancies went up; as did crop production, land values, and relative wealth. Probably no country benefited from DDT more than Nepal, where spraying began in 1960. At the time, more than two million Nepalese, mostly children, suffered from malaria. By 1968, the number was reduced to 2,500; and life expectancy increased from 28 to 42 years.

However, studies in Europe, Canada, and the United States have since shown that DDT didn’t cause the human diseases Carson had claimed. Indeed, the only type of cancer that had increased in the United States during the DDT era was lung cancer, which was caused by cigarette smoking. DDT was arguably one of the safer insect repellents ever invented—far safer than many of the pesticides that have taken its place.

originally posted by: Edumakated
a reply to: Nathan-D

Interesting theory (not saying it can't be valid) although correlation does not equal causation.

I can't embed, but google "Correlation does not equal causation" and all kinds of similar graphs of completely unrelated things will show up. For example, US science and technology spending trends exactly with deaths of strangulation, suicides, etc.

Or number of people who drowned matches almost perfectly with marriage rates in Kentucky.


Just saying...

I can see US tech and strangulation/suicide deaths having the same pattern. We had an old saying in CI, "When the job is done, so are scientists."

Cheers - Dave

a reply to: NorthOfStuff

In developing countries the oral vaccine is used due to its low cost and accessibility, needing only two drops per dose. In western countries, a more expensive, injectable version of the vaccine – which contains an inactivated virus incapable of causing the disease – is used as a preventative.

The onset has been caused by a type 2 virus contained in the vaccine. Type 2 is a wild virus that was eliminated years ago, but in rare cases the live virus in oral polio vaccines can mutate into a form capable of igniting new outbreaks of the disease.

www.theguardian.com...

Sad. Looks like it’s from the cheaper oral vaccine given to people with no discourse to complain.

a reply to: butcherguy
There is no FACTUAL scientific proof of that. From what I understand Silent Spring the book was almost 100% discredited. Also please show me any proof in the rise in cancers.
Both of my parents and grand parents got gassed with the stuff REGULARLY and all my grand parents lived into there 90's and my parents are in their 80's. ZERO health issues with ANY of them much less cancer.

My guess? It was way to effective...they didn't want malaria and all other mosquito born illness to be eradicated....there is no money to be made by that.

If what is going on right now with this Covid cash grab doesn't open your eyes up to the fact that it has ALWAYS been about the money 'even back then' I don't know what will

a reply to: Nathan-D

Was it around before DDT? If so question answered.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

You act like stuff has never been tested on public before being sold. In such case the spike copies the introduction perfectly

a reply to: Nathan-D

The graph looks to me like Polio was on the rise before DDT came out and went into decline before DDT was phased out.

Also, I looked at a far wider time scale and there was a polio outbreak in the US in 1916 with 27,363 cases and 7,130 deaths - well before DDT.

Polio - Our World in Data

Since DDT is persistent, also why did Polio decline so markedly, and not after DDT?