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.


Cash Money and The Germ Theory

page: 1

log in


posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 09:20 PM
The Germ Theory is what the modern Western Medical Field is mostly based on. According to it, germs (bacteria & viruses) are the cause of disease. This is false in my opinion. Why? If someone's immune system is strong, the germs won't usually cause disease. In Natural Medicine, and many other Medical Systems (East Asia, etc.) the germs are the SYMPTOM, not the cause. If someone is unhealthy, and gets sick, they blame it on germs, because that's what the modern Western Medical Field has taught us for years. If the person was healthy, they probably wouldn't get sick at all.

What does this have to do with Cash Money?

Cash Money is very "dirty" with germs, as everyone knows. Most money is now non-existent physically. It's all electronic except for a few thousand $ per person average.

Now, since most people have been brainwashed to believe the Germ Theory, the government might be able to convince people to get rid of physical Cash Money, especially this fall when the Swine Flu and regular flu causes millions to be sick. They'll say that Cash Money is spreading germs, and people will believe it.

I personally am a fairly healthy individual, so I'm not afraid of germs. When the flu season hits hard, it will be those McDonald-eating, obese, prescription-druggies who get the most sick. . . . and they'll blame it on germs. Germs are abundant on Cash Money. Think about it.

Will the government make all money electronic to protect people from germs? We're almost at that point already. As I've said, and you can look it up yourselves, actual Cash Money is only a small percentage of money today.

The government could also use the excuse of reducing crime, drug use, etc... because if all money is electronic, then illegal transactions will be nearly impossible.

Any thoughts?

posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 09:26 PM
Very tangible scenario. I think we've been heading there, but we really needed a good reason to push us over the edge. I think they have determined by our reactions, that disease is an awesome way to motivate change.

It wouldn't surprise me a bit. I know it's not wise, but I go through weeks without ever touching a piece of cash...I am so boned when the banks close.

Cash is too hard to deal with any more.

posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 10:22 PM
reply to post by bettermakings

You might want to learn a thing or two about germs, how they communicate, and how they infect.

Further, we know that bacteria causes illness and disease. This is evident as Joseph Lister, the father of aseptic technique, was able to successfully and dramatically reduce the number of post-surgical infections and illnesses by simply washing his hands before surgery. After Louis Pasteur's discovery of rot and spoilage being be traced back to micro-organisms, Lister, upon reading this discovery, began experimenting to confirm the results and discover a useful chemical antiseptics by which to sterilize surgical/medical equipment.

Aseptic technique and sterilization have saved countless lives over the years. The concordance of mountains of independent data sets between multiple medical institutes and across multiple armed conflicts over the last 200 years... as well as the success of antibiotics and the astounding length at which we can keep perishable food from spoiling compared to conditions prior to pasteurization and aseptic technique is far more than is necessary to seal the deal for any rational thinker.

Brainwashing does not factor into it. I swear, some people here go out of their way to be stupid for naught but the sake of promoting stupidity.

Honestly, if you don't believe it... do your own experimentation and see for yourself. Most school children do so as part of their curriculum, but perhaps you were out sick that day.

posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 11:44 PM
The germ theory doesn't exactly say that germs cause disease. This is obviously untrue because our bodies are filled with germs. Without those germs, we'd get sick. We need the germs to help us digest our food, for example. That's what e. coli and other bacteria do in the intestines.

The basis of the germ theory is that when the body becomes weakened, then germs can invade it. The germs go where they're not normally found, or germs that don't usually cause problems now are infecting us. An imbalance in the body allows these germs to cause disease.

Unfortunately, too many people tried the simple-minded approach to health, by trying to destroy the germs. Can't be done. They'll be here long after humanity becomes extinct. All that has happened is, we are less often exposed to germs, so our immune systems don't develop the toughness they once did. That's why so many American tourists get sick when they go to another country. Their immune systems can't handle the bacteria they encounter in the water and food, because they've never seen them before. Most people in those countries are exposed to these germs from birth on, and are basically immune.

Another problem is that we use antibiotics for everything from bacterial infections to baldness (well, almost). All we're doing is breeding stronger germs. What we need to be doing is teaching our bodies how to better fight the germs they encounter.

The germ theory is not at all the sentiment that, "germ bad". It's that imbalances in the body enable germs to infect it, which is perfectly true.

posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 12:15 AM
reply to post by chiron613

The germ theory is not at all the sentiment that, "germ bad". It's that imbalances in the body enable germs to infect it, which is perfectly true.

That depends upon the pathogen. Certainly the Bubonic Plague (which was a bacterial agent) caused extraordinary levels of mortality in otherwise healthy individuals, and not just during one outbreak - but spread over several centuries and in varying intensities In that such case, Germ most definitely = bad. It's still with us causing annual deaths, too, btw (though, at far few numbers)

But yes... bacteria and other microbes living on and around us are largely beneficial. There are thousands of different species interacting with us constantly. Over 500 different species in the average human intestinal tract alone. I did skim rather lightly over the beneficial purposes of bacteria and microbes as well as their role in our health.

posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 03:03 AM
reply to post by Lasheic

I'm sorry, but I, along with many educated "stupid" people, do not agree 100% with you.

You see, Pasteur wasn't completely correct and admitted it on his death-bed. It's the body's environment which is MORE important. The facts are there clear and simple: Healthy people do not get sick as much. I could make-out with a woman who has the flu and not get the flu, or if I do get the flu it will go away in 24 hours without much harm. That is the proof. Unhealthy people get more sick. Fat people get more sick. Healthy people get less sick.

I do think surgeons should wash their hands, but because most people's bodies are too weak to handle the germs.

In my opinion (and millions of other people's opinions, usually the healthy ones), think that the germs & sickness are a SYMPTOM of the real cause. The real cause could be an unhealthy diet or lifestyle, or something like that.

As for antibiotics, yes, they have helped some people temporarily, but in the long run they aren't very beneficial, and often harmful. The body creates its own antibiotics, natural antibiotics. Artificial antibiotics make the body dependent on the drugs, and not the natural body's resistance to disease.

If I DO get sick, I will let my body's natural immune system heal me. Once I get better, my immune system becomes even stronger. If I take antibiotics, I will get better but my immune system will be weak, and I will get sick again. Only if I'm going to DIE will I take antibiotics.

Drinking unclean water kills many poor children in the world, so I'm not saying that "germs" can't make people sick directly. The water they drink, however, is so full of parasites that it overwhelms the body of a young child who is already malnourished with a weak immune system. Once cleaner water is available, however, they aren't sick anymore. I'm not saying germs don't exist or don't ever cause disease, but in America today, they are not the main cause of disease and sickness; an unhealthy diet & lifestyle is the root cause.

posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 03:20 AM
Leaving using germs as a tool for removing cash money theory aside - healthy people do not get as ill as not healthy. This is pretty obvious. However immune system and general health of even healthiest individual have their limits and there are bacterial/viral infection that are very very deadly to all. There are illnesses that use immune system as a home ground (like HIV). There are cases of immune system itself overacting to simple infection/foreign substance and killing the individual who is as healthy as one can be.
Natural approach on relying ONLY on our built-in defenses is just as wrong as relying only on active ingredients in medications. In my opinion.

new topics

top topics


log in